I'm very interested in your approach.
IMHO, as Aoki investigated, the overhead of markers is not so big
unless we put a lot of them into kernel. And from "active"
overhead point of view, it takes less than tens of nano-seconds,
while kprobes takes hundreds of nano-seconds. Kprobe also has a
limitation of probable points, it can't probe "__kprobes" marked
functions. So, original markers still has advantages.
However, your approach is also useful, especially for embedding
thousands of markers in kernel or drivers.
So I think it's better to use both of them as the situation demands.
I just have one comment on its name. Since it doesn't trace
anything, so I'd rather like notation() or note_mark() than
trace_simple(). :-)
Thank you,
--
Masami Hiramatsu
Software Engineer
Hitachi Computer Products (America) Inc.
Software Solutions Division
e-mail: mhiramat@redhat.com
--