[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4A124DAB.109@cn.fujitsu.com>
Date: Tue, 19 May 2009 14:11:55 +0800
From: Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
CC: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Tom Zanussi <tzanussi@...il.com>,
"Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
Steven Whitehouse <swhiteho@...hat.com>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] convert block trace points to TRACE_EVENT()
Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 02:20:03PM +0800, Li Zefan wrote:
>> TRACE_EVENT is a more generic way to define tracepoints. Doing so adds
>> these new capabilities to this tracepoint:
>>
>> - zero-copy and per-cpu splice() tracing
>> - binary tracing without printf overhead
>> - structured logging records exposed under /debug/tracing/events
>> - trace events embedded in function tracer output and other plugins
>> - user-defined, per tracepoint filter expressions
>> ...
>>
>> Cons and problems:
>>
>> - no dev_t info for the output of plug, unplug_timer and unplug_io events.
>> no dev_t info for getrq and sleeprq events if bio == NULL.
>> no dev_t info for rq_abort,...,rq_requeue events if rq->rq_disk == NULL.
>>
>> - for large packet commands, only 16 bytes of the command will be output.
>> Because TRACE_EVENT doesn't support dynamic-sized arrays, though it
>> supports dynamic-sized strings.
>>
>> - a packet command is converted to a string in TP_assign, not TP_print.
>> While blktrace do the convertion just before output.
>>
>> - in blktrace, an event can have 2 different print formats, but a TRACE_EVENT
>> has a unique format. (see the output of getrq and rq_insert)
>
> I'm starting to think it would be nice to choose between several outputs
> in a trace event.
> Ie: perhaps we need a kind of per event flag, something simple, just to
> choose between several TP_printk output. Not sure how much it would
> (non) trivial to implement though...
>
If a trace event wants several TP_printk output, probably it wants different
structs of trace entry, otherwise we'll be wasting memory.
--
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