Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2 v2] Unified trace buffer

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Steven Rostedt
Date: Thursday, September 25, 2008 - 10:48 am

On Thu, 25 Sep 2008, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:

One answer is that your counter wrap problem is extended.

That is, you have 27 bits of time between each event to not worry about
wraps. But if you go against the page itself, the last event on that page
is more likely to suffer.

-- Steve
--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[RFC PATCH 1/2 v2] Unified trace buffer, Steven Rostedt, (Thu Sep 25, 8:58 am)
Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2 v2] Unified trace buffer, Linus Torvalds, (Thu Sep 25, 10:02 am)
Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2 v2] Unified trace buffer, Steven Rostedt, (Thu Sep 25, 10:16 am)
Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2 v2] Unified trace buffer, Linus Torvalds, (Thu Sep 25, 10:25 am)
Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2 v2] Unified trace buffer, Mathieu Desnoyers, (Thu Sep 25, 10:35 am)
Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2 v2] Unified trace buffer, Steven Rostedt, (Thu Sep 25, 10:46 am)
Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2 v2] Unified trace buffer, Steven Rostedt, (Thu Sep 25, 10:48 am)
Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2 v2] Unified trace buffer, Mathieu Desnoyers, (Thu Sep 25, 11:25 am)