[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20081125154054.GA21493@elte.hu>
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 16:40:54 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Frédéric Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Human readable output for function return tracer
* Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:
> > Do you agree with "full function tracer" (since we hook now on the
> > two sides)?
>
> "full function tracer" sounds a bit funny and quirky. How about
> "function call tracer"? Versus the "function tracer" or "function
> entry tracer" which is the lighter variant - both in name and in
> overhead. So we'd have:
>
> # cat /debug/tracing/available_tracers
> mmiotrace wakeup irqsoff function function-call sysprof sched_switch initcall nop
>
> note how intuitive it is: "function-call" is 'more' than just the
> plain function-tracer. It also expresses its main property: it
> traces the full call, entry and exit and return code as well.
another similar naming would be: the "function-graph" tracer.
function-callgraph would be too long.
i think "function-call" is the best of all - relatively short and
expressive.
Ingo
--
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