[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <877gcw7ie8.fsf@sejong.aot.lge.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2013 14:31:11 +0900
From: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
To: Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>
Cc: Pekka Enberg <penberg@....fi>,
Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Hemant Kumar <hkshaw@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
hegdevasant@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
anton@...hat.com, systemtap@...rceware.org,
aravinda@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] Support for perf to probe into SDT markers:
Hi Masami,
On Tue, 29 Oct 2013 12:19:37 +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> (2013/10/29 2:48), Pekka Enberg wrote:
>> For the 32-bit and 64-bit libc case, why cannot 'perf list'
>> by default print out something like:
>>
>> $ perf list
>>
>> libc:setjmp [SDT marker group]
>>
>> and provide a '--fully-qualified' command line option that:
>>
>> $ perf list --fully-qualified
>>
>> libc:setjmp => libc32:setjmp, libc64:setjmp [SDT marker group]
>> libc32:setjmp => libc:setjmp@...b/libc.so.6 [SDT marker]
>> libc64:setjmp => libc:setjmp@...b64/libc.so.6 [SDT marker]
>>
>> and then teach 'perf trace' to deal with SDT marker groups
>> where you trace two events, not one?
>
> Ah, that's a good idea. :)
> And it also is needed for another probe event because
> sometimes inlined functions have multiple instances.
> I'd like to fold them as one event group.
Yes, I'd love to see it as well. :)
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