[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4B556855.6040800@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2010 10:07:49 +0200
From: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
To: Jim Keniston <jkenisto@...ibm.com>
CC: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, ananth@...ibm.com,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...radead.org>,
utrace-devel <utrace-devel@...hat.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...hat.com>,
Maneesh Soni <maneesh@...ibm.com>,
Mark Wielaard <mjw@...hat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH 1/7] User Space Breakpoint Assistance Layer (UBP)
On 01/19/2010 12:15 AM, Jim Keniston wrote:
>
>> I don't like the idea but if the performance benefits are real (are
>> they?),
>>
> Based on what seems to be the closest thing to an apples-to-apples
> comparison -- counting the number of calls to a specified function --
> uprobes is 6-7 times faster than the ptrace-based equivalent, ltrace -c.
> And of course, uprobes provides much, much more flexibility, appears to
> scale better, and works with multithreaded apps.
>
> Likewise, FWIW, utrace is more than 10x faster than strace -c in
> counting system calls.
>
>
This is still with a kernel entry, yes? Do you have plans for a variant
that's completely in userspace?
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
--
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