[lkml]   [2013]   [Dec]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH v0 04/71] itrace: Infrastructure for instruction flow tracing units
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 03:23:41PM +0200, Alexander Shishkin wrote:
> Peter Zijlstra <> writes:
> > On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 02:36:16PM +0200, Alexander Shishkin wrote:
> >> Instruction tracing PMUs are capable of recording a log of instruction
> >> execution flow on a cpu core, which can be useful for profiling and crash
> >> analysis. This patch adds itrace infrastructure for perf events and the
> >> rest of the kernel to use.
> >>
> >> Since such PMUs can produce copious amounts of trace data, it may be
> >> impractical to process it inside the kernel in real time, but instead export
> >> raw trace streams to userspace for subsequent analysis. Thus, itrace PMUs
> >> may export their trace buffers, which can be mmap()ed to userspace from a
> >> perf event fd with a PERF_EVENT_ITRACE_OFFSET offset. To that end, perf
> >> is extended to work with multiple ring buffers per event, reusing the
> >> ring_buffer code in an attempt to reduce complexity.
> >
> > Please read the thread here:
> >
> > On my thoughts of this creative mmap() usage.
> That's unfortunate, it made sense to me. But let's then have a look at
> the alternative approaches. Bearing in mind that it is crucial for us to
> export trace buffers to userspace as opposed to processing the trace
> data in the kernel, the fact that we still need the normal perf data
> stream and your dislike for mmap trickery, we need two separate file
> descriptors: one for the perf data and one for the trace data.

Why don't you start by explaining _why_ you need a second stream to
begin with?

 \ /
  Last update: 2013-12-18 15:01    [W:0.233 / U:0.212 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site