[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20101004155410.GA5381@nowhere>
Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2010 17:54:44 +0200
From: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] workqueue: Add a trace event for works enqueuing
On Mon, Oct 04, 2010 at 04:46:56PM +0200, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Sorry about the delay. I was off last week.
>
> How about something like this? It probably needs to be split into two
> patches. It provides more information on which CPU was requested and
> eventually chosen and separates queueing and activation which can be
> useful for analyzing latency or freezer issues.
>
> Thanks.
Yep looks good. I hadn't thought about frozen works.
Thanks.
(I think this should go through your tree rather than the tracing tree).
--
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