From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752202AbZBHPRT (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 Feb 2009 10:17:19 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751311AbZBHPRK (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 Feb 2009 10:17:10 -0500 Received: from hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com ([71.74.56.124]:56928 "EHLO hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751160AbZBHPRK (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 Feb 2009 10:17:10 -0500 Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2009 10:17:07 -0500 (EST) From: Steven Rostedt X-X-Sender: rostedt@gandalf.stny.rr.com To: Frederic Weisbecker cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Ingo Molnar , Jens Axboe , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [PATCH tip 2/2] tracing: Introduce trace_buffer_{lock_reserve,unlock_commit} In-Reply-To: <20090208130437.GB6130@nowhere> Message-ID: References: <20090205181413.GI17653@ghostprotocols.net> <20090205225835.GB23999@nowhere> <20090206015416.GF9846@ghostprotocols.net> <20090206023944.GA24546@nowhere> <20090206031015.GH9846@ghostprotocols.net> <20090208130437.GB6130@nowhere> User-Agent: Alpine 1.10 (DEB 962 2008-03-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, 8 Feb 2009, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > > > Ok, yes by making the flags per tracer, it will goes well. > Just one thing, the insertion of an event is sometimes a hot path > like with the functions tracer. And such facility adds some unused function calls > and branch checking. > But on such cases, we can use directly the ring buffer functions :-) Yes, please keep the direct calls to the ring buffer on the function tracer. The function tracer is also special, in that if we have dynamic tracing turned on, we can simply point to a different function that does different things depending on trace settings. Thanks, -- Steve