From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751250AbVIRAal (ORCPT ); Sat, 17 Sep 2005 20:30:41 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751253AbVIRAak (ORCPT ); Sat, 17 Sep 2005 20:30:40 -0400 Received: from ozlabs.org ([203.10.76.45]:50072 "EHLO ozlabs.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751250AbVIRAak (ORCPT ); Sat, 17 Sep 2005 20:30:40 -0400 Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2005 10:25:50 +1000 From: Anton Blanchard To: Soeren Sandmann Cc: John Levon , bert hubert , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Announce: Sysprof 1.0 -- a sampling, systemwide Linux profiler Message-ID: <20050918002550.GB17639@krispykreme> References: <20050917211656.GA27448@outpost.ds9a.nl> <20050917222015.GA32019@trollied.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.10i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, > My motive is not to duplicate oprofile - I basically don't care about > the kernel level mechanism as long as it can produce stack traces that > the GUI can interprete and analyse. In fact, one of the first times I > wrote about sysprof publicly [1], I said: > > It seems to me that since oprofile probably reports more and > better data than my kernel module, we should try and get the > graphical presentation from sysprof to present oprofile data. > > and I still think so, but it's a fairly substantial amount of work to > get rid of 296 lines of code. Looking at your kernel module it should be pretty easy to plug on top of oprofile callgraph data. All the hard work of programming hardware performance counters will then come for free. Cross platform support will also come for free. Anton