lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Dec]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/3] ARM Coresight: Enhance ETM tracing control
On Wed, Dec 04, 2013 at 10:49:25PM -0500, Adrien Vergé wrote:
> 2013/12/4 Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>:
> > How much overhead does the existing tracing code have on ARM? Is ETM
> > still even needed? Why not just use ETM for the core tracing code
> > instead?
>
> Coresight ETM is not just faster than /sys/kernel/debug/tracing, it
> provides more detailed and customisable info. For instance, you can
> trace every load, store, instruction fetch, along with the number of
> cycles taken, with almost zero-overhead.

Can't you already do that with the 'perf' tool the kernel provides
without the ETM driver?

> > What's wrong with the in-kernel tracing logic that you can't use that
> > instead of the ETM stuff?
>
> ETM has a different purpose. Integrating it in
> /sys/kernel/debug/tracing would not take advantage of all its
> features.

What is it's purpose then? At first glance, this seems to be exactly
what 'perf' provides already. Doesn't perf work on ARM today?

thanks,

greg k-h
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-12-05 05:21    [W:0.067 / U:0.504 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site