[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1372342372.1734.6.camel@leonhard>
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2013 23:12:52 +0900
From: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
To: David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...stprotocols.net>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung.kim@....com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/19] perf ftrace: Add support for --pid option
2013-06-27 (목), 07:56 -0600, David Ahern:
> On 6/26/13 11:23 PM, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> > The pid filtering in ftrace is done via set_ftrace_pid file under the
> > tracing debugfs directory. IIRC It only supports process filtering not
> > thread filtering by iterating all threads in the kernel code. So --tid
> > option cannot be implemented as other perf commands.
> >
> > So I chose not to and assigned -t option to --tracer.
>
> Could that ever change? With the current code why call it pid in the
> option but assign it to target.tid? Seems a like a source for confusion
Hmm.. right. I did it in order not to do same iteration of the thread
group in user space. But now I think that it's just an unnecessary
optimization and can confuse readers.
> later. Would be better to just assign to target.pid and let the
> machinery do the right thing.
Will do.
Thanks,
Namhyung
--
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