[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1287499599.16971.380.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2010 10:46:39 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
Koki Sanagi <sanagi.koki@...fujitsu.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
nhorman@...driver.com, scott.a.mcmillan@...el.com,
laijs@...fujitsu.com, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, eric.dumazet@...il.com,
kaneshige.kenji@...fujitsu.com, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
izumi.taku@...fujitsu.com, kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tracing: Cleanup the convoluted softirq tracepoints
On Tue, 2010-10-19 at 16:07 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> The vector computation is compared to the extra tracing induced jumps
> probably not even measurable. Stop defending horrible coding with
> handwavy performance and impact arguments.
Yes this was crappy code, I'm not defending it. But this code was from
the original tracepoints. I just looked at when this code was added, and
it was still in the time TRACE_EVENT() was in a major flux. Heck, the
code resided in include/trace/irq.h and not include/trace/events/irq.h.
And yes, a lot of decisions back then were put on handwaving performance
and impact, and it was not just coming from us.
I admit I should have cleaned it up, but I did not want to touch it
until it actually broke ;-)
-- 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