* Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
there might be some confusion here. Google for "mcount tracing utility"
- there's 2270 hits. There's been 8 full series posted to lkml in the
past month:
Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2008 02:16:09 -0500
Subject: [RFC PATCH 00/11] mcount tracing utility
Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2008 18:29:14 -0500
Subject: [RFC PATCH 00/22 -v2] mcount and latency tracing utility -v2
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 15:49:07 -0500
Subject: [RFC PATCH 00/30 v3] mcount and latency tracing utility -v3
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 10:22:31 -0500
Subject: [RFC PATCH 00/23 -v4] mcount and latency tracing utility -v4
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2008 11:02:36 -0500
Subject: [PATCH 00/20 -v5] mcount and latency tracing utility -v5
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 23:21:52 -0500
Subject: [PATCH 00/23 -v6] mcount and latency tracing utility -v6
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 22:15:21 -0500
Subject: [PATCH 00/22 -v7] mcount and latency tracing utility -v7
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 16:03:57 -0500
Subject: [PATCH 00/23 -v8] mcount and latency tracing utility -v8
it derives from the same latency tracer code that we wrote for -rt that
has been around for years:
http://people.redhat.com/mingo/latency-tracing-patches/
we renamed the concept to 'ftrace' during pre-merge cleanups, perhaps
that is what caused you to not recognize this? (mcount is a confusing
name and ties it to a gcc feature while there's nothing gcc specific
about this concept.)
Ingo
--
