Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/3] perf: Take a hot regs snapshot for traceevents

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Wed, 2010-03-03 at 12:07 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> oops, my bad :-), I thought this was in the x86 arch directory. For the
> University, I was helping them with adding trace points for page faults
> when I came across this in arch/x86/mm/fault.c:
> 
>         perf_sw_event(PERF_COUNT_SW_PAGE_FAULTS, 1, 0, regs, address);
> 
> 
> This is what I actually was wondering about. Why is it a "perf only"
> trace point instead of a TRACE_EVENT()?

Because I wanted to make perf usable without having to rely on funny
tracepoints. That is, I am less worried about committing software
counters to ABI than I am about TRACE_EVENT(), which still gives me a
terribly uncomfortable feeling.

Also, building with all CONFIG_TRACE_*=n will still yield a usable perf,
which is something the embedded people might fancy, all that TRACE stuff
adds lots of code.

--
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/