From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755782AbcECI5K (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 May 2016 04:57:10 -0400 Received: from merlin.infradead.org ([205.233.59.134]:51984 "EHLO merlin.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755741AbcECI5I (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 May 2016 04:57:08 -0400 Date: Tue, 3 May 2016 10:56:51 +0200 From: Peter Zijlstra To: Alexander Shishkin Cc: Thomas Gleixner , x86@kernel.org, Borislav Petkov , Ingo Molnar , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, vince@deater.net, eranian@google.com, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Mathieu Poirier , "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/7] perf: Introduce address range filtering Message-ID: <20160503085651.GL3430@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <1461771888-10409-1-git-send-email-alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com> <1461771888-10409-6-git-send-email-alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1461771888-10409-6-git-send-email-alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2012-12-30) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 06:44:46PM +0300, Alexander Shishkin wrote: > Many instruction trace pmus out there support address range-based > filtering, which would, for example, generate trace data only for a > given range of instruction addresses, which is useful for tracing > individual functions, modules or libraries. Other pmus may also > utilize this functionality to allow filtering to or filtering out > code at certain address ranges. > > This patch introduces the interface for userspace to specify these > filters and for the pmu drivers to apply these filters to hardware > configuration. > > The user interface is an ascii string that is passed via an ioctl > and specifies (in the form of an ascii string) address ranges within > certain object files or within kernel. There is no special treatment > for kernel modules yet, but it might be a worthy pursuit. > > The pmu driver interface basically add two extra callbacks to the > pmu driver structure, one of which validates the filter configuration > proposed by the user against what the hardware is actually capable of > doing and the other one translates hardware-independent filter > configuration into something that can be programmed into the > hardware. Alexander, could you please write a manpage patch for this new API?