lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2014 14:03:50 -0400 From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> To: "Javi Merino" <javi.merino@....com> Cc: "linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Punit Agrawal <Punit.Agrawal@....com>, "broonie@...nel.org" <broonie@...nel.org>, Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@...el.com>, Eduardo Valentin <edubezval@...il.com>, Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v5 09/10] thermal: add trace events to the power allocator governor On Thu, 10 Jul 2014 17:20:14 +0100 "Javi Merino" <javi.merino@....com> wrote: > > > > How many CPUs are you saving load_cpu on? A trace event can't be bigger > > than a page. And the data is actually a little less than that with the > > required headers. > > The biggest system I've tested it on is an 8 cpu system (with > NR_CPUS==8). So yes, small and we haven't seen any issues. > > Are you saying that we are siphoning too much data through ftrace? He > find it really valuable to collect information during run and process > it afterwards but I can see how this may not be feasible for systems > with thousands of cpus. Only too much for a single event. Perhaps have the tracepoint post per CPU? Then you wouldn't need that array. -- Steve -- 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