Re: Ftrace Data Export

[Felipe Balbi <felipe.balbi@linux.intel.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1289 bytes --]


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

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 832 bytes --]