[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1271715227.10448.145.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2010 18:13:47 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Cc: Tim Bird <tim.bird@...sony.com>, Tom Zanussi <tzanussi@...il.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Chase Douglas <chase.douglas@...onical.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: request to add trace off and trace on with events
On Tue, 2010-04-20 at 00:04 +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 05:37:54PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > # cat event/sched/sched_switch/triggers/tracing_off
> > disabled
> >
> > Or it can be a filter, or enabled.
>
>
> Yep, since it would share exatly the same code than filter (as
> filter basically becomes a trigger command), it can behave the
> same: displaying "none" when there is no filter, or a filter.
>
Then do we make the triggers themselves directories too?
# ls event/sched/sched_switch/triggers/tracing_off
filter enable
?
>
> >
> > This could also allow a user to do:
> >
> > echo "(a > 100)" > tracing_on
> > echo "(a < 100)" > tracing_off
>
>
> Yeah :)
> But if the scope of the "tracing off" is only for this event, then
> rather use:
>
> echo "(a < 100)" > filter
>
> You could have tracing_off/on that have this event scope and
> tracing_off/on_all for a global tracing scope.
The two are not equivalent. In fact, just enabling a trigger does not
mean that the event itself will be traced.
-- Steve
--
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