From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 21:26:11 -0400 From: "Frank Ch. Eigler" Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/4] kmemtrace: Core implementation. Message-ID: <20080723012611.GB28486@redhat.com> References: <1216751493-13785-1-git-send-email-eduard.munteanu@linux360.ro> <1216751493-13785-2-git-send-email-eduard.munteanu@linux360.ro> <20080723005002.GA5206@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080723005002.GA5206@localhost> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Eduard - Gabriel Munteanu Cc: penberg@cs.helsinki.fi, cl@linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rdunlap@xenotime.net, mpm@selenic.com List-ID: Hi - On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 03:50:02AM +0300, Eduard - Gabriel Munteanu wrote: > [...] Sounds like a good idea, but I'd like to get rid of markers > and use Mathieu Desnoyers' tracepoints instead. I'm just waiting for > tracepoints to get closer to inclusion in mainline/-mm. OK. > It would be great if tracepoints completely replaced markers, so > SystemTap would use those instead. Raw tracepoints are problematic as they require a per-tracepoint C function signature to be synthesized by the tool (or hard-coded in the tool or elsewhere). We haven't worked out how best do to this. OTOH, markers don't require such hard-coding, so are simpler for a general tool to interface to. > However, if tracepoints are not ready when kmemtrace is to be merged, > I'll take your advice and mention markers and SystemTap. Thanks either way - I'm glad you found an existing tracing mechanism usable and didn't choose/need to invent your own. - FChE -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org