Re: [PATCH 2/3] perf_event: cleanup for event profile buffer operation

[Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@redhat.com>]

Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 11:21:46AM -0500, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
>> Hmm, could you make it inline-functions or add __kprobes?
>> Because it is called from kprobes, we don't want to probe
>> the function which will be called from kprobes handlers itself.
>>
>> (IMHO, from the viewpoint of performance, inline-function
>>  could be better.)
>>
>> Thank you,
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, may be inline ftrace_profile_buf_end, would be better.
> But we shouldn't inline ftrace_profile_buf_begin() I guess,
> considering its size.

Indeed, especially for events...

> While at it, may be let's choose more verbose names
> like
> 
> ftrace_profile_buf_fill() and ftrace_profile_buf_submit().
> 
> Also, profile is a bit of a misnomer. Not a problem since
> ftrace_profile_templ_##call() is already a misnomer, but
> we should start a bit of a rename. Sometimes, perf only
> profiles trace events as counters and sometimes it records
> the raw samples too.
> 
> So, as more generic names, I would suggest:
> 
> ftrace_perf_buf_fill() and ftrace_perf_buf_submit().


Actual filling buffer is done in the profile handlers,
so I think ftrace_perf_buf_prepare() may be better :-)
ftrace_perf_buf_submit is good to me:-)

Thank you,


-- 
Masami Hiramatsu

Software Engineer
Hitachi Computer Products (America), Inc.
Software Solutions Division

e-mail: mhiramat@redhat.com