[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <57A3527A.2060108@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2016 20:04:34 +0530
From: Aravinda Prasad <aravinda@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: Hari Bathini <hbathini@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, daniel@...earbox.net,
peterz@...radead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
acme@...nel.org, alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com,
mingo@...hat.com, paulus@...ba.org, ebiederm@...ssion.com,
kernel@...p.com, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, ananth@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 2/3] tracefs: add instances support for uprobe
events
On Thursday 04 August 2016 07:38 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Aug 2016 19:16:03 +0530
> Aravinda Prasad <aravinda@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>
>
>> Separation is based on the context in which the function is called.
>> Hence, containers can see only those kernel functions that are
>> triggered/invoked by the processes running inside that container and
>> should not see other kernel functions, for example, called by RCU grace
>> period kthread or any other kthread.
>>
>
> What about interrupts and softirqs? They run under the container
> process's context, but service other processes outside the container.
> Same goes for trace events.
Interrupts and softirqs are tricky. We have not yet figured that out.
Same for trace events. Had similar discussion for trace events with
Brendan:
http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-perf-users/msg03018.html
(Last section of the mail is on trace event)
Regards,
Aravinda
>
> -- Steve
>
--
Regards,
Aravinda
Powered by blists - more mailing lists