[lkml]   [2014]   [Oct]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Re: [PATCH v3 5/5] perf/sdt: Add support to perf record to trace SDT events
(2014/10/23 17:21), Namhyung Kim wrote:
> Hi Masami,
> On Thu, 23 Oct 2014 15:33:37 +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
>> (2014/10/23 14:54), Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
>>> I am somehow not able to figure out how perf probe comes into the
>>> current workflow.
>>> I think the current design was
>>> 1. perf sdt-cache --add <file> (only once per file)
>>> 2. perf record -e <sdt-event>
>>> So what is the additional thing that perf probe does or Is it going to
>>> replace any of the above steps?
>> 3. perf probe -a <sdt-event>
>> And this will be done subsequently in this series (without user interface part).
>> However, current implementation of 2. will do the following steps
>> s1. get sdt event data from sdt-cache
>> s2. set up sdt events with suppressing messages
>> s3. do recording events
>> (s4. and hiding existing sdt events from perf-probe --list)
>> s5. remove sdt events
>> So, what I proposed were ;
>> - to implement s2., we can introduce --quiet(-q) option and use it
>> instead of ->sdt flag checking
>> - removing s4. and s5.
>> - and add verification of existing sdt events at s2. if needed.
> I'm okay with removing the s4 but not sure about the s5. In that case,
> we might have many dynamic events in a system without noticing to users.

Indeed, okey, so let's keep s5 then :)

Thank you,

Software Platform Research Dept. Linux Technology Research Center
Hitachi, Ltd., Yokohama Research Laboratory

 \ /
  Last update: 2014-10-23 11:21    [W:0.040 / U:5.524 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site