From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
"Luis Claudio R. Goncalves" <lclaudio@uudg.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
ldv@altlinux.org, esyr@redhat.com,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Rough idea of implementing blocking perf calls for system call tracepoints
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2018 09:45:23 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181130094523.1bc91052@gandalf.local.home> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181130140158.GD3617@krava>
On Fri, 30 Nov 2018 15:01:58 +0100
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com> wrote:
> > or perhaps just tracepoints.. does not seem to make much
> > sense for he events
>
> actualy the syscalls seems to be enough for now ;-) I tried
> something and ended up with hack below
Actually, we *only* want to do syscalls. We really don't want to add
blocking to trace events. That would be a nightmare for deadlocks and
such.
I was thinking about adding a PTRACE feature that makes this part of
PTRACE. That is, we start this via PTRACE and let PTRACE signal the
tracer process when the tracee process blocks, and it can then wake up
the tracee process.
A tracer must have PTRACE permissions anyway. The goal of this is to
speed up syscall tracing.
-- Steve
prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-11-30 14:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-11-28 18:47 Rough idea of implementing blocking perf calls for system call tracepoints Steven Rostedt
2018-11-28 19:18 ` Steven Rostedt
2018-11-30 10:40 ` Jiri Olsa
2018-11-30 11:48 ` Jiri Olsa
2018-11-30 14:01 ` Jiri Olsa
2018-11-30 14:45 ` Steven Rostedt [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=20181130094523.1bc91052@gandalf.local.home \
--to=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=esyr@redhat.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=jolsa@redhat.com \
--cc=lclaudio@uudg.org \
--cc=ldv@altlinux.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mhiramat@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).