Messages in this thread | | | From | Felipe Balbi <> | Subject | Re: Ftrace Data Export | Date | Mon, 05 Jun 2017 09:17:59 +0300 |
| |
Hi,
Chunyan Zhang <zhang.chunyan@linaro.org> writes: >> Maybe that's why they consider it an extra overhead? Have you considered >> off-loading raw data for further post processing? > > Yes, that's also the way off-loading function trace has been implemented now. > And like you said below, I also believe we can do the similar things > to other tracers. > I'd like to do this, but I have some other tasks in hands recently :-(
fair enough
>>>> function_graph, hwlat, irqsoff and all the other possibilities? >>> >>> I haven't thought about these clear enough :) >>> Any suggestion? >> >> I think we should be able to export everything and anything :-p But, of >> course, we would need tooling to decode it after the fact. > > Yes, tools for decoding these raw data with kernel binary is one > thing, and how large storage STM can use to collect traces will also > affect how much value doing this will bring in and perhaps will > influence how we implement off-loading ftrace to trace export. > > Since I haven't played Intel STM, how large are the storages connected > to STM on Intel platforms in general?
that I don't know :-) My interest here is to off-load it via USB. I suppose Alex knows the size of STM storage on Intel systems.
-- balbi [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
| |