[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20101110182749.GG22410@elte.hu>
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2010 19:27:49 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
ying.huang@...el.com, bp@...en8.de, tglx@...utronix.de,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mchehab@...hat.com,
Frédéric Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC/Requirements/Design] h/w error reporting
* Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-11-10 at 18:48 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> > Yep. The obvious direction is to extend the event buffering ABI we already have,
> > with whatever additions that are needed:
> >
> > - document that we already support flight recorder mode
>
> I thought this was still broken?
Please document that as well.
> > - a more compressed record format
> >
> > - NOP filler events up to page boundary, for better splice and for better flight
> > recorder
> >
> > - splice support
> >
> > etc. That's how it evolved until now and it's all very extensible.
> >
> > Steve, could you please list the additions you have in mind, in order of priority?
>
> A few of things that pop up quickly are:
>
> 1) lockless
>
> 2) as-fast-as possible
>
> 3) support all tasks / all CPUs and still have as-fast-as-possible
Yeah - that's a self-evident goal for just about any kernel code.
Ingo
--
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