Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 12 Nov 2008 11:58:24 +0100 | From | "Frédéric Weisbecker" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/2] tracing/fastboot: Use the ring-buffer timestamp for initcall entries |
| |
2008/11/12 Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>: > > * Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Impact: Split the boot tracer entries in two parts: call and return >> >> Now that we are using the sched tracer from the boot tracer, we want >> to use the same timestamp than the ring-buffer to have consistent >> time captures between sched events and initcall events. So we get >> rid of the old time capture by the boot tracer and split the >> initcall events in two parts: call and return. This way we have the >> ring buffer timestamp of both. >> >> There is an example of a trace in attachment. >> >> Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com> >> --- >> include/trace/boot.h | 31 ++++++++--- >> init/main.c | 32 ++++++------ >> kernel/trace/trace.h | 17 ++++-- >> kernel/trace/trace_boot.c | 123 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------- >> 4 files changed, 144 insertions(+), 59 deletions(-) > > applied to tip/tracing/fastboot, thanks Frederic! > > one small detail, do we need these messages in the boot tracer: > > ##### CPU 1 buffer started #### > > they are helpful for latency traces but might be confusing for boot > traces. (they lose their attraction after having seen a dozen of them) > > Ingo >
Yes. I'm using the default formatting output in trace.c so perhaps there is some iter flag I should dynamically remove from the boot tracer to avoid that or perhaps I may format a custom output for sched entries for the boot tracer. I will see that....
By the way Arjan, does the actual state of the boot tracer match your needs? You can find an example of its trace here: http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/x86/linux-2.6-tip.git;a=commit;h=74239072830ef3f1398edeb1bc1076fc330fd4a2
| |