[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c62985530811121535t13a60c93y9e4c22e365ca1b34@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2008 00:35:44 +0100
From: "Frédéric Weisbecker" <fweisbec@...il.com>
To: "Steven Rostedt" <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...e.hu>,
"Linux Kernel" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] tracing/function-return-tracer: Call prepare_ftrace_return by registers
2008/11/13 Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>:
>
> On Wed, 12 Nov 2008, Fr?d?ric Weisbecker wrote:
>
>> 2008/11/12 Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>:
>> >
>> > btw., should we now rename it all to the function-cost tracer?
>>
>> Yes. I'm preparing a patch to do these renames....
>
> I still need to look deeper at your patch set, but what about
> "ftrace-exit"? Perhaps in the future this could be used by other tracers
> to record exiting of a function.
Hmm... The whole thing is splitted in two levels: the infrastructure
to trace on call and return (and call
a return handler) and the higher level tracer.
The first could be called ftrace_exit because it is waht it does.
And the second is much more about cost evaluation of functions and so
could be named function_cost. Its
functions and structures could have this in their name whereas the low
level things could have ftrace_exit in
their name.
What do you think?
--
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