linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] tracing, perf: add more power related events

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1285180000.2275.1036.camel@laptop>
Date:	Wed, 22 Sep 2010 20:26:40 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>,
	Jean Pihet <jean.pihet@...oldbits.com>,
	Thomas Renninger <trenn@...e.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>, arjan@...radead.org,
	Kevin Hilman <khilman@...prootsystems.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
	linux-omap@...r.kernel.org, linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-trace-users@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tracing, perf: add more power related events

On Wed, 2010-09-22 at 14:15 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-09-22 at 19:30 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Wed, 2010-09-22 at 10:06 -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > 
> 
> > That said, I really didn't read this discussion much, but your stance
> > seems to be that any tracepoint you use must stay valid, and I object to
> > that.
> 
> We could add a TRACE_EVENT_ABI() as Ingo has been suggesting. If
> anything, it could mean that the given tracepoint will always have the
> same name. And perhaps the data it holds will always be there, but may
> also be extended.

I still don't see why you need TRACE_EVENT_ABI for that, if its the same
name and the format can be extended you get the same results with what
we've got. Apps need to read/parse the format thing anyway.

> > 
> > What will do you do when we include a new scheduling policy and all the
> > scheduler tracepoints need to change? (yes that's really going to
> > happen)
> 
> The tracepoint sched_switch should stay the same. We may add more data,
> but the comm, pid, prio => comm, pid, prio, I don't see going away.

Right, it would need additional fields. Preferably not only at the end.

> > I'm not going to carry double tracepoints, and I'm not going to not
> > merge that policy. 
> 
> Not sure what you mean by "double tracepoints"

Two different tracepoints in the same location.
--
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/