[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5C4C569E8A4B9B42A84A977CF070A35B2C57F7A90D@USINDEVS01.corp.hds.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 21:23:49 -0500
From: Seiji Aguchi <seiji.aguchi@....com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
CC: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Vaibhav Nagarnaik <vnagarnaik@...gle.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Michael Rubin <mrubin@...gle.com>,
David Sharp <dhsharp@...gle.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
Satoru Moriya <satoru.moriya@....com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 2/2] trace,x86: Add x86 irq vector entry/exit tracepoints
Steven,
Thank you for giving me an explanation in detail how stacktrace works.
I was confused stacktrace.
>> Rip in local timer interrupt is more accurate information
>> for achieving my goal than stacktrace
>
>Does the above change your mind?
I'm concerned about amount of consumption of ring buffer because
I would like to use a background tracer for multiple cases in our costomer's system
for solving several issues.
As you know, I'm trying to improve tracepoints of signal events with others.
https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/11/30/223
And I'm posting a patch of jbd2 event by myself.
https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/11/29/328
How much does stacktrace consume ring buffer, compared to a tracepoint?
Seiji
--
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