[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100114092350.GF12241@basil.fritz.box>
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 10:23:50 +0100
From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To: Joshua Pincus <joshua.pincus@...il.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
"K.Prasad" <prasad@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, peterz@...radead.org,
paulus@...ba.org, acme@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: HW breakpoints perf_events request
> We would like to avoid using ptrace at all costs.
> It requires us to have a parent thread running
> which monitors all the others. It's not clear that
> the wait() call by the parent doesn't mask a barrage
> of signals from various threads and the performance
mask? It'll report them. You expect to have so
many signals that this would be a problem?
-Andi
--
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