Re: tracepoint maintainance models

[Alan Cox]

Ar Llu, 2006-09-18 am 12:15 -0400, ysgrifennodd Frank Ch. Eigler:
> > [...] So its L1 misses more register reloads and the like. Sounds
> > more and more like wasted clock cycles for debug. [...]
> 
> But it's not just "for debug"!  It is for system administrators,
> end-users, developers.

It is for debug. System administrators and developers also do debug,
they may just use different tools. The percentage of schedule() calls
executed across every Linux box on the planet where debug is enabled is
so close to nil its noise. Even with traces that won't change.

> Indeed, there will be some non-zero execution-time cost.  We must be
> willing to pay *something* in order to enable this functionality.

There is an implementation which requires no penalty is paid. Create a
new elf section which contains something like

	[address to whack with int3]
	[or info for jprobes to make better use]
	[name for debug tools to find]
	[line number in source to parse the gcc debug data]


-
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/