linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] perf_counter: add tracepoint support

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20090710035319.GA5077@elte.hu>
Date:	Fri, 10 Jul 2009 05:53:19 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Jason Baron <jbaron@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	paulus@...ba.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] perf_counter: add tracepoint support


* Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl> wrote:

> On Thu, 2009-07-09 at 05:10 +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:

> > (RFD parenthesis: why not using the one in kernel/trace for all 
> > perf events? Now that it is lockless, it would fit nicely 
> > inside: no fear about NMI context).
> 
> because that one doesn't have a single-buffer mode you can mmap().

Yeah, the ring-buffer code could certainly be abstracted out better 
to allow this. Once that is done it would allow us to do a couple of 
nice things: such as splice support (which could perhaps be faster 
than mmap for perf record) and the sampling of tracepoints would 
become a whole lot easier a well. But it's certainly not a trivial 
job!

	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/