On Fri, 13 Oct 2017 09:17:00 +0200
Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> Updated version; Steve could you route these 4 patches, they're mostly
> kernel/trace/ related.
I just pull these in. They are fine for 4.15 right? They don't need to
go to stable do they?
-- Steve
Updated version; Steve could you route these 4 patches, they're mostly
kernel/trace/ related.
---
Subject: perf/ftrace: Fix function trace events
From: Peter Zijlstra
Date: Tue Oct 10 17:15:47 CEST 2017
The function-trace <-> perf interface is a tad messed up. Where all
the other trace <-> perf
On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 05:02:28PM +0800, zhouchengming wrote:
> On 2017/10/11 15:45, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > + if (!(flags& PERF_EF_START))
> > + p_event->hw.state = PERF_HES_STOPPED;
>
> Don't we need to check the flags for ftrace perf_event?
> So if we should put
On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 09:04:20AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Oct 2017 13:59:54 +0200
> Jiri Olsa wrote:
>
> > > @@ -330,7 +354,7 @@ perf_ftrace_function_call(unsigned long
> > > entry->ip = ip;
> > > entry->parent_ip = parent_ip;
> > > perf_trace_buf_submit(entry, ENTRY_SIZE
On Wed, 11 Oct 2017 13:59:54 +0200
Jiri Olsa wrote:
> > @@ -330,7 +354,7 @@ perf_ftrace_function_call(unsigned long
> > entry->ip = ip;
> > entry->parent_ip = parent_ip;
> > perf_trace_buf_submit(entry, ENTRY_SIZE, rctx, TRACE_FN,
> > - 1, ®s, head, NULL);
> >
On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 09:45:30AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
SNIP
> void perf_trace_del(struct perf_event *p_event, int flags)
> {
> struct trace_event_call *tp_event = p_event->tp_event;
> - hlist_del_rcu(&p_event->hlist_entry);
> - tp_event->class->reg(tp_event, TRACE_REG_PER
On 2017/10/11 15:45, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
The function-trace<-> perf interface is a tad messed up. Where all
the other trace<-> perf interfaces use a single trace hook
registration and use per-cpu RCU based hlist to iterate the events,
function-trace actually needs multiple hook registrations
7 matches
Mail list logo
