On Sat, 6 Nov 2010 00:43:46 +0800, Liu Aleaxander <aleaxan...@gmail.com> wrote: > Well, what are the steps you excepted to get an aub file? Please tell > me, then I may know your > points better. > > > > > > Still requires post-processing to add the aub headers, but this will allow > > runtime enabling of the capture. How does this sound? > > Yes, runtime enabling of the capture is great. And post-processing > isn't that bad at all. > What I concerned is how much hard or easy for user to generate an aub > file. As Nanhai said, > if user met some problem, we can ask him for an aub file, then we > might know what was going > wrong. This is the biggest advantage of aub file. So, I'm not trying > to ask you give up the > tracepoints(it really nice for tracing something down), I just want an > easy way to get an aub file > for us, and especially for user.
Right. If we want to ask the user to gather some debug info, it essentially has to be from within X and be as simple as run 'intel-gpu-trace myapp'. Using ftrace is the simplest way to achieve that. Having to rmmod i915.ko rules out mmiotrace as a viable candidate. But we can easy add two tracepoints to I915_READ and I915_WRITE which can be enabled at runtime, exported via /sys/kernel/debug/tracing and automated in a little tool. -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
