Re: PATCH] ftrace: Add a C/P state tracer to help poweroptimization
From: Arjan van de Ven
Date: Mon Oct 27 2008 - 17:06:32 EST
On Mon, 27 Oct 2008 15:47:30 -0400
fche@xxxxxxxxxx (Frank Ch. Eigler) wrote:
>
> Arjan van de Ven <arjan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> > [...]
> > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpufreq/acpi-cpufreq.c
> > [...]
> > @@ -427,6 +429,8 @@ static int acpi_cpufreq_target(struct
> > cpufreq_policy *policy, }
> > }
> >
> > + trace_power_mark(&it, POWER_PSTATE, next_perf_state);
> > +
> > switch (data->cpu_feature) {
> > case SYSTEM_INTEL_MSR_CAPABLE:
> > cmd.type = SYSTEM_INTEL_MSR_CAPABLE;
> > [...]
>
> Is there some reason that this doesn't use tracepoints instead
> of such a single-backend hook?
because it's a ton simpler this way? do simple things simpe and all
that....
--
Arjan van de Ven Intel Open Source Technology Centre
For development, discussion and tips for power savings,
visit http://www.lesswatts.org
--
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/