From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752771AbYKLNH7 (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Nov 2008 08:07:59 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751911AbYKLNHu (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Nov 2008 08:07:50 -0500 Received: from mx3.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.1.138]:51741 "EHLO mx3.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751898AbYKLNHu (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Nov 2008 08:07:50 -0500 Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2008 14:07:14 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: Steven Rostedt Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton , Frederic Weisbecker , Theodore Tso , Arjan van de Ven Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] unlikely profiler and tracer Message-ID: <20081112130714.GA24472@elte.hu> References: <20081112051438.843792214@goodmis.org> <20081112105314.GB31958@elte.hu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamScore: -1.5 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-1.5 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00,DNS_FROM_SECURITYSAGE autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.3 -1.5 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] 0.0 DNS_FROM_SECURITYSAGE RBL: Envelope sender in blackholes.securitysage.com Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Steven Rostedt wrote: > > On Wed, 12 Nov 2008, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Steven Rostedt wrote: > > > > > Ingo, > > > > > > The following patches are in: > > > > > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rostedt/linux-2.6-trace.git > > > > > > branch: tip/devel > > > > > > Steven Rostedt (2): > > > trace: profile likely and unlikely annotations > > > ftrace: unlikely annotation tracer > > > > i've created a new topic branch for this tracer: > > tip/tracing/branch-tracer, and applied your patches to that branch. > > Good idea, > > This profiler is very useful, but also very intrusive. I would like > it to get a broader audience for testing. two more small details i noticed: - does it do proper self-test? It doesnt seem so at first sight. - i'd suggest a rename patch that does UNLIKELY_PROFILE => BRANCH_PROFILING. [ 'to profile' is the verb we use generally (it's a noun too but we tend to use 'profiling' for that in other places of the kernel) - so we already have CONFIG_PROFILING, etc. ] Ingo