[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090417134557.GA23493@elte.hu>
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 15:45:57 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Zhaolei <zhaolei@...fujitsu.com>
Cc: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Tom Zanussi <tzanussi@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] ftrace, workqueuetrace: Make workqueue
tracepoints use TRACE_EVENT macro
* Zhaolei <zhaolei@...fujitsu.com> wrote:
> +TRACE_EVENT(workqueue_insertion,
> +TRACE_EVENT(workqueue_execution,
> +TRACE_EVENT(workqueue_creation,
> +TRACE_EVENT(workqueue_destruction,
I'm missing all the worklet tracepoints i suggested. (and i think
which you had in earlier versions)
Basically, i'd suggest the following complete set of events instead:
TRACE_EVENT(workqueue_create
TRACE_EVENT(workqueue_flush /* NEW */
TRACE_EVENT(workqueue_destroy
TRACE_EVENT(worklet_enqueue /* NEW */
TRACE_EVENT(worklet_enqueue_delayed /* NEW */
TRACE_EVENT(worklet_execute /* instead of workqueue_execution */
TRACE_EVENT(worklet_complete /* NEW */
TRACE_EVENT(worklet_cancel /* NEW */
This allows the understanding of the life cycle of a workqueue and
of worklets that enter that workqueue. Note the distinction between
workqueue and worklet (work) - that is essential.
The parameters of the events are obvious, with one detail: i'd
suggest a 'cpu' parameter to the enqueue events, to allow the
mapping of the _on(..cpu) variants too.
I would not bother with schedule_on_each_cpu() instrumentation -
it's rarely used.
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