[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20090129123827.A959.KOSAKI.MOTOHIRO@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2009 12:42:55 +0900 (JST)
From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
To: Mathieu Desnoyers <compudj@...stal.dyndns.org>
Cc: kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com, ltt-dev@...ts.casi.polymtl.ca,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [ltt-dev] LTTng 0.87 improved page fault tracing
Hi
interesting..
> I just combined the 4 page fault handler events that were in the tracing
> hot path of LTTng into 2 :
>
> kernel page_fault_entry
> kernel page_fault_exit
>
> They take as parameter the combination of what was available in the
> trap_entry/exit events and handle_mm_fault entry/exit events. This
> should lessen the performance impact of the tracer when it's active.
> I did the related modifications in LTTV 0.12.8.
Just question.
As far as I know, customer has two different requeremtn of the page fault.
(1) collect number of all page fault
-> if it is too large, too many interrupt decrease performance.
(2) collect number of major page fault
-> major page fault indicate to increase random access I/O,
then, some customer want to collect major page fault
(don't include minor page fault)
Is this patch fill (2) requirement?
--
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