[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160503085651.GL3430@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Tue, 3 May 2016 10:56:51 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, x86@...nel.org,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, vince@...ter.net, eranian@...gle.com,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...radead.org>,
Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>,
"Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <mtk.manpages@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/7] perf: Introduce address range filtering
On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 06:44:46PM +0300, Alexander Shishkin wrote:
> Many instruction trace pmus out there support address range-based
> filtering, which would, for example, generate trace data only for a
> given range of instruction addresses, which is useful for tracing
> individual functions, modules or libraries. Other pmus may also
> utilize this functionality to allow filtering to or filtering out
> code at certain address ranges.
>
> This patch introduces the interface for userspace to specify these
> filters and for the pmu drivers to apply these filters to hardware
> configuration.
>
> The user interface is an ascii string that is passed via an ioctl
> and specifies (in the form of an ascii string) address ranges within
> certain object files or within kernel. There is no special treatment
> for kernel modules yet, but it might be a worthy pursuit.
>
> The pmu driver interface basically add two extra callbacks to the
> pmu driver structure, one of which validates the filter configuration
> proposed by the user against what the hardware is actually capable of
> doing and the other one translates hardware-independent filter
> configuration into something that can be programmed into the
> hardware.
Alexander, could you please write a manpage patch for this new API?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists