[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1264430883.4283.1907.camel@laptop>
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2010 15:48:03 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Hitoshi Mitake <mitake@....info.waseda.ac.jp>
Cc: Jason Baron <jbaron@...hat.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Tom Zanussi <tzanussi@...il.com>,
Steven Rostedt <srostedt@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/12] perf lock: New subcommand "perf lock", for
analyzing lock statistics
On Mon, 2010-01-25 at 23:15 +0900, Hitoshi Mitake wrote:
>
> As Peter told, this patch series depends on lockdep.
> But, checking dependency and tracing lock events are
> essentially different things. So I think dividing these is possible.
Still you need quite a lot of instrumentation at the actual lock sites,
not something you'd want to have on your production machine.
> But, perf depends on debugfs.
> I don't know about production box well,
> does your production box turns on debugfs?
> It seems that debugfs is not a thing for production box...
debugfs isn't a problem to have.
> And I'm interesting in in-kernel histogram of locks.
> Is there requirement of it?
> I have some ideas (not done yet, completely).
No real concrete ideas yet.. One possibility is to add a range,
bucket_size tuple to perf_event_attr and store the histrogram in the
mmap() area instead of samples.
One difficulty is how to specify what to make that histogram over.
Anyway, its all open still..
--
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