Hi -

On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 05:49:19PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
quoted text
> [...]
> > But I have not seen a lot of situations where that kind of glue-code was
> > needed, so I think it makes sense to keep markers simple to use and
> > efficient for the common case.
> >
> > Then, in this glue-code, we can put trace_mark() and calls to in-kernel
> > tracers.
> 
> I'm almost done with the latency tracer work, and there are only a total
> of 6 hooks that I needed.
> [...]
> With the above, we could have this (if this is what I think you are
> recommending). [...]
> static inline trace_switch_to(struct task_struct *prev,
> 			struct task_struct *next)
> {
> 	trace_mark(kernel_schedudule,
> 		"prev_pid %d next_pid %d prev_state %ld",
> 		prev->pid, next->pid, prev->pid);
> 
> 	trace_context_switch(prev, next);
> }

I'm afraid I don't see the point in this.  You could use one marker
for all that data (and force the more naive tracer callbacks to ignore
out some of them).  You could even use two markers (and force the more
naive tracer to attach to only to its favorite subset).  But to use a
second, different, less efficient, not more configurable tracing hook
mechanism in the same logical spot makes no sense to me.

- FChE
--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/