[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20131218141125.GT21999@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2013 15:11:25 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...stprotocols.net>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>, Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...il.com>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v0 04/71] itrace: Infrastructure for instruction flow
tracing units
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 04:01:04PM +0200, Alexander Shishkin wrote:
> > Why don't you start by explaining _why_ you need a second stream to
> > begin with?
>
> Oh, I'm sure I've explained it earlier ([1], [2])
See, I didn't read 0 because that information gets lost and patches
should be self explanatory, and i didn't get to the Intel driver yet
because well, I got stuck in the generic code.
> but why not. The data
> in the second stream is generated at a rate which is hundreds of
> megabytes per second per core. Decoding this data is ~1000 times slower
> than generating it. Ergo, can't be done in kernel, needs to be exported
> as-is to userspace for later retreival and decoding. Doing it via perf
> stream means an extra copy, which at these rates is a waste. Ergo, a
> second buffer.
Still confused, if you cannot copy it into one buffer, then why can you
copy it into a second buffer?
--
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