RE: [PATCH v4] trace,x86: add x86 irq vector tracepoints

[Seiji Aguchi]

> >
> > I didn't say anything magic, but a table of pointers that are very
> > critical for the system running. Should we implement it with a single
> > switch, like we discussed in San Diego to do with the system call table?
> >
> > That is, have a "normal" table, and a "trace" table. The trace table
> > points to functions that have tracepoints. The first enabler of
> > tracing switches the table to use the tracepoints, and the last
> > disabler switches it back?
> >
> 
> That is certainly a reasonable implementation option.  It is slightly less usable than it is for system calls, though, because the vectors in
> the IDTs are somewhat scrambled and so you can't just do an indirect jump to the original vector content.  This does get messy
> because you also want to preserve registers...
> 

Peter, Steven, 

Thank you for explaining the reason why you think a time penalty should be zero
and discussing its implementation.

I will update my patch so that a time penalty makes zero and submit it shortly.

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/