Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751831AbbH2ChX (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Aug 2015 22:37:23 -0400 Received: from szxga03-in.huawei.com ([119.145.14.66]:24243 "EHLO szxga03-in.huawei.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751389AbbH2ChW (ORCPT ); Fri, 28 Aug 2015 22:37:22 -0400 Message-ID: <55E11AB1.5020203@huawei.com> Date: Sat, 29 Aug 2015 10:36:33 +0800 From: "Wangnan (F)" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alexei Starovoitov , CC: , , , , , , , , , , , , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Ingo Molnar , Steven Rostedt Subject: Re: [PATCH 32/32] bpf: Introduce function for outputing data to perf event References: <1440745570-150857-1-git-send-email-wangnan0@huawei.com> <1440745570-150857-33-git-send-email-wangnan0@huawei.com> <55E10091.6020107@plumgrid.com> <55E108BC.4050107@huawei.com> <55E10C2D.5090300@plumgrid.com> <55E115BD.6090909@huawei.com> <55E1174A.2000102@plumgrid.com> In-Reply-To: <55E1174A.2000102@plumgrid.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.111.66.109] X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected X-Mirapoint-Virus-RAPID-Raw: score=unknown(0), refid=str=0001.0A020205.55E11AC1.0021,ss=1,re=0.000,recu=0.000,reip=0.000,cl=1,cld=1,fgs=0, ip=0.0.0.0, so=2013-05-26 15:14:31, dmn=2013-03-21 17:37:32 X-Mirapoint-Loop-Id: 05720787b4c96cd8ca4a42d37c8a0817 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 979 Lines: 26 On 2015/8/29 10:22, Alexei Starovoitov wrote: > On 8/28/15 7:15 PM, Wangnan (F) wrote: >> I'd like to see whether it is possible to create dynamic tracepoints so >> different receivers can listen on different tracepoints. > > see my proposal A. I think ftrace instances might work for this. > > I'm not sure about 'format' part though. Kernel side shouldn't be > aware of it. It's only the contract between bpf program and user process > that deals with it. > It is an option. Let's keep an open mind now :) For current patch 32/32, I think it is useful enough for some simple cases, and we have already start using it internally. What about keep it as what it is now and create a independent method for your usecase? Thank you. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/