[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20151125171243.GA2214@krava.brq.redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2015 18:12:43 +0100
From: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>, lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] ftrace: Add separate handler for ftrace:function
event
On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 12:02:57PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 17:50:57 +0100
> Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> > > This seems redundant. I never understood the control_ops that perf uses
> > > in the function tracing infrastructure. Why can't you just register the
> > > event->ops and have that ops set the filtering? Then the ftrace
> > > infrastructure will only call that event handler for the functions its
> > > filtered on. Then you don't need to do it again. Right now ftrace
> > > already does that with the generic "control_ops" that perf uses, but
> > > now you are doing it again. Seems rather pointless.
> >
> > well thats exactly what we are doing.. but as all ops
> > share single callback we need to find the proper event
> > this callback was triggered for
>
> The ftrace_ops has a "private" field for the user to set. Could you
> make that point back to the event that allocated the ftrace_ops?
> Then the callback function could easily get the event that matches the
> ftrace_ops.
aaah did not see this one ;-) that will do.. nice
>
> >
> > currently we use tracepoint callback (perf_tp_event)
> > where the proper event is found based on the event->filter
> >
> > however this is not the case for ftrace:function because
> > filter will not change the event->filter, but the ops filter
>
> Yeah, I'm trying to figure out the paths here. I would love to remove
> the control_ops as that complicates the function tracing code a bit
> more than I would like it to be.
perf is using the control interface to enable and disable function
tracing any time the process (and its events) is scheduled in/out
sched_in(event) -> ftrace_function_local_enable(&event->ftrace_ops)
sched_out(event) -> ftrace_function_local_disable(&event->ftrace_ops)
>
> I just crashed function tracing by function tracing perf doing function
> tracing :-) I'm currently debugging that (and adding more code to help
> debug things like this).
;-)
jirka
--
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