Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Thu, 23 Oct 2014 11:01:04 +0530 | From | Hemant Kumar <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3 5/5] perf/sdt: Add support to perf record to trace SDT events |
| |
On 10/22/2014 03:11 PM, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > (2014/10/22 17:20), Hemant Kumar wrote: >>>> From "file_sdt_ent" we will find out the file name. >>>> Convert this sdt note into a perf event and then write this into uprobe_events >>>> file to be able to record the event. >>>> Then, corresponding entries are added to uprobe_events file for >>>> the SDT events. >>>> After recording is done, these events are silently deleted from uprobe_events >>>> file. The uprobe_events file is present in debugfs/tracing directory. >>>> >>>> To support the addition and deletion of SDT events to/from uprobe_events >>>> file, a record_sdt struct is maintained which has the event data. >>> OK, I have some comments on this. >>> >>>> An example usage: >>>> >>>> # ./perf record -e %user_app:fun_start -aR /home/user_app >>> At first, I'd like to add SDT support for adding probes too, like below; >>> >>> ./perf probe -a '%user_app:fun_start $vars' >> But I think, previously we discussed that we won't be having "perf >> probe" for SDT events. >> We list them and probe/trace them using "perf record" directly. > Right, sorry for confusing you. I meant that I'd like to support SDT on both of > perf-record and perf-probe :)
I plan to do this and add this subsequently but will it be okay if we go with the current implementation for the time being?
What do you think?
> And even if we'll hide sdt related events via perf, users can access it via ftrace. > So, I doubt that we can completely hide them, in that case, honesty is the best way;) > > Thank you, > >
-- Thanks, Hemant Kumar
|  |