RE: [PATCH]trace,x86: add x86 irq vector tracepoints

[Seiji Aguchi]

> > > > +DECLARE_EVENT_CLASS(irq_vector,
> > > > +
> > > > +	TP_PROTO(int irq),
> > > > +
> > > > +	TP_ARGS(irq),
> > > > +
> > > > +	TP_STRUCT__entry(
> > > > +		__field(	int,	irq	)
> 
> Shouldn't this be vector?
> 

Ok. I will change it to vector.

> > > > +DEFINE_EVENT(irq_vector, nmi_entry, DEFINE_EVENT(irq_vector,
> > > > +nmi_exit, DEFINE_EVENT(irq_vector, local_timer_entry,
> > > > +DEFINE_EVENT(irq_vector, local_timer_exit,
> > > > +DEFINE_EVENT(irq_vector, reschedule_entry,
> > > > +DEFINE_EVENT(irq_vector, reschedule_exit,
> > > > +DEFINE_EVENT(irq_vector, call_function_entry,
> > > > +DEFINE_EVENT(irq_vector, call_function_exit,
> > > > +DEFINE_EVENT(irq_vector, call_function_single_entry,
> > > > +DEFINE_EVENT(irq_vector, call_function_single_exit,
> > > > +DEFINE_EVENT(irq_vector, irq_work_entry, DEFINE_EVENT(irq_vector,
> > > > +irq_work_exit, DEFINE_EVENT(irq_vector, invalidate_tlb_entry,
> > > > +DEFINE_EVENT(irq_vector, invalidate_tlb_exit,
> 
> So this set is pretty generic and applicable across architectures. Good.
>

Thanks.
 
> > > > +DEFINE_EVENT(irq_vector, error_apic_entry,
> > > > +DEFINE_EVENT(irq_vector, error_apic_exit,
> > > > +DEFINE_EVENT(irq_vector, thermal_apic_entry,
> > > > +DEFINE_EVENT(irq_vector, thermal_apic_exit,
> > > > +DEFINE_EVENT(irq_vector, threshold_apic_entry,
> > > > +DEFINE_EVENT(irq_vector, threshold_apic_exit,
> > > > +DEFINE_EVENT(irq_vector, spurious_apic_entry,
> > > > +DEFINE_EVENT(irq_vector, spurious_apic_exit,
> > > > +DEFINE_EVENT(irq_vector, x86_platform_ipi_entry,
> > > > +DEFINE_EVENT(irq_vector, x86_platform_ipi_exit,
> 
> That part is x86 specific. If we go that route, we'll end up with gazillions of arch specific vectors sooner than later.
> 
> Either we find better and more widely applicable names for them, if there are similar functionalities on other architectures available,
> or 

I'm not familiar with other architectures...

>we should have a single generic tracepoint for those which cannot be be mapped to anything useful shared across architectures.
> 
> Those x86 specific ones are not really frequently raised vectors, so enabling them all won't affect performance and readability of the
> traces too much.

OK. I will unify these to a single tracepoint.
"x86_irq_vector" or so?

Seiji
--
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/