[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20091114001020.GB24738@elte.hu>
Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2009 01:10:20 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>
Cc: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...hat.com>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
systemtap <systemtap@...rces.redhat.com>,
DLE <dle-develop@...ts.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -tip 3/3] Add get_signal tracepoint
* Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com> wrote:
> This is orthogonal to the core-dump tracepoint, I don't see why you
> call them a unified patch series.
>
> The proper name for this event is "signal delivery". But since the
> proper name for "send_signal" is "signal generation", I suppose "get"
> is analogously improper to the existing "send" tracepoint. ;-)
I'd suggest to add include/trace/events/signal.h and put these
tracepoints there.
> Especially if you call this "get" rather than "deliver", there is
> another place that should invoke this tracepoint (or perhaps a third
> one). sys_rt_sigtimedwait "gets" a signal without delivering it. In
> POSIX terminology this is called "accepting" the signal: the three
> things that can happen in the life of a signal are "generate",
> "deliver", and "accept". If you are trying to match up what happened
> to a signal generated by kill() or whatnot, then you want to notice
> both delivery and acceptance as the complementary event.
>
> (And again I have no clue why this signal stuff should be called
> "sched" at all.)
it shouldnt be called 'sched' - it should go into 'events/signal.h'.
But we also need fuller coverage than this. Coredumps and signal
delivery events are just a small part of all things signals, we also
want:
- signal generation events (send_sig*() variants)
- signal IPI/wakeup events
- signal loss events (queue overflow)
- [ optional: signal blocking/unblocking events ]
- [ optional: specific signal handler installation/deinstallation ]
That's what we generally require of new events: they should form a
coherent whole, a logical set of events that 'make sense' and explain
the workings of a subsystem on a given level of detail.
How finegrained or coarse the level of details is is an open question,
but if a given level of detail has been picked, we want completeness on
that level.
So for example in the list above, the '[ optional ]' events are
finegrained ones that could be left out of the initial version.
We've done this consistently for all subsystems that added tracepoints:
scheduling, locking, timers, workqueues, block IO, SLAB, IRQs, etc., and
we want a similar approach for newly covered subsystems (such as
signals) as well.
Thanks,
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