[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1418551001.14250.25.camel@marge.simpson.net>
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2014 10:56:41 +0100
From: Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@...il.com>
To: Josef Bacik <jbacik@...com>
Cc: bmaurer@...com, rkroll@...com, kernel-team@...com,
mingo@...hat.com, peterz@...radead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched/fair: change where we report sched stats
On Thu, 2014-12-11 at 09:55 -0500, Josef Bacik wrote:
> How did you do it? I had one latency spike in a 90 minute test that
> runs across 30 boxes that could have been caused by anything, so if
> there is a way I could have easily found that without moving these
> tracepoints around I'd love to hear it. Thanks,
If I have a target, I tend to set tracing_off() traps.
Seems you want an ftrace tracer that tracks sched_switch sleeping to
sched_switch running in addition to the wakeup latency tracer.
-Mike
--
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