Re: [PATCH 2/3] perf_event: cleanup for event profile buffer operation
From: Masami Hiramatsu
Date: Mon Jan 18 2010 - 12:50:01 EST
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
> 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:-)
Hitachi Computer Products (America), Inc.
Software Solutions Division
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/