[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4AF848C0.7010807@monstr.eu>
Date: Mon, 09 Nov 2009 17:52:16 +0100
From: Michal Simek <monstr@...str.eu>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
CC: wuzhangjin@...il.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
John Williams <john.williams@...alogix.com>
Subject: dynamic ftrace - graph
Hi Steve and others,
I have working dynamic ftrace function. :-)
I look at __ftrace_modify_code function and I have one question about.
Below are function which are called when I enable function_graph.
I personally think that make more sense to call
ftrace_enable_ftrace_graph_caller before ftrace_update_ftrace_func.
The reason for it is that graph_caller enable calling graph tracing
which should be setup before ftrace_update_ftrace_func which enable
whole tracing function.
# cd ; mkdir /debug; mount -t debugfs none /debug; cat
/debug/tracing/available_tracers; echo function_graph >
/debug/tracing/current_tracer;echo 0 > /debug/tra
cing/tracing_enabled;cat /debug/tracing/trace | head -n 10
function_graph function sched_switch nop
ftrace_update_ftrace_func 0xc0009100 0xc00091c4, 0xb000c000, 0x32809100
ftrace_enable_ftrace_graph_caller
# tracer: function_graph
For disabling graph trace is sequence ok I think.
# echo function > /debug/tracing/current_tracer
ftrace_disable_ftrace_graph_caller
ftrace_update_ftrace_func 0xc006afe4 0xc00091c4, 0xb000c006, 0x3280afe4
What do you think?
Thanks,
Michal
--
Michal Simek, Ing. (M.Eng)
w: www.monstr.eu p: +42-0-721842854
Maintainer of Linux kernel 2.6 Microblaze Linux - http://www.monstr.eu/fdt/
Microblaze U-BOOT custodian
--
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