[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.1.10.0809301541120.7993@gandalf.stny.rr.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 15:43:45 -0400 (EDT)
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>
cc: Martin Bligh <mbligh@...gle.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, prasad@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, od@...e.com,
"Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, hch@....de,
David Wilder <dwilder@...ibm.com>,
Tom Zanussi <zanussi@...cast.net>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] LTTng relay buffer allocation, read, write
On Tue, 30 Sep 2008, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
>
> You are actually using them to put redundant information that could be
> encoded differently and thus save 4 bits per event records, more or less
> what will be needed by most tracers (15 IDs, 1 reserved for an extended
> ID field).
I really like the idea of keeping the tracer event ids out of the ring
buffer logic.
>
> So the fact that you use them does not mean they are really required,
> and I don't think such duplicated information actually makes things more
> solid. Maybe just more obscure ?
Well, at least for version 1 these bits stay. I already found two bugs by
hitting the event padding when the size said it should not have. This
redundant information makes me feel a bit more cozy when they match.
-- Steve
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists