From: "Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@redhat.com>
To: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>, Martin Peschke <mp3@de.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@osdl.org, hch@infradead.org,
arjan@infradead.org, James.Smart@emulex.com,
James.Bottomley@steeleye.com, ltt-dev@shafik.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] [Patch 0/8] statistics infrastructure
Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 14:55:21 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060517185521.GM17707@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200605171844.k4HIiPd1028516@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>
Hi -
On Wed, May 17, 2006 at 02:44:24PM -0400, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote:
> On Wed, 17 May 2006 14:28:08 EDT, "Frank Ch. Eigler" said:
> > I am not suggesting a single solution for all needs. I wanted to
> > focus only one aspect: the marking of those points in the kernel where
> > something probeworthy occurs with hooks. [...]
>
> The problem is that the "common pool" ends up being a very wide swamp
> very fast. [...]
> So under your plan, all 3 groups now use a "common pool" that includes
> slap, timing, latency, and other stuff - and nobody's using more than
> 1/3 of it, but paying the performance penalty for the 2/3 unused hooks....
It may not be clear, but by "pool", I mean some group of individually
activated hooks, doing little but calling some routine of
instrumentation with a few parameters. Special-interest data like
timing, latency would be computed in the instrumentation code, not
necessarily at the hook site, so that part need incur no waste for
disinterested users.
Not-activated (dormant) hooks would indeed cost a little. The
question is how much time/space cost is acceptable, in order to reap
the benefits of widely available probing.
- FChE
prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-05-17 18:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-05-16 17:44 Martin Peschke
2006-05-17 17:23 ` Frank Ch. Eigler
2006-05-17 18:05 ` Andi Kleen
2006-05-17 18:28 ` Frank Ch. Eigler
2006-05-17 18:44 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2006-05-17 18:55 ` Frank Ch. Eigler [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20060517185521.GM17707@redhat.com \
--to=fche@redhat.com \
--cc=James.Bottomley@steeleye.com \
--cc=James.Smart@emulex.com \
--cc=Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu \
--cc=ak@suse.de \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=arjan@infradead.org \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ltt-dev@shafik.org \
--cc=mp3@de.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®