Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261262AbTITCC3 (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Sep 2003 22:02:29 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261263AbTITCC2 (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Sep 2003 22:02:28 -0400 Received: from zero.aec.at ([193.170.194.10]:33288 "EHLO zero.aec.at") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261262AbTITCC2 (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Sep 2003 22:02:28 -0400 To: "Villacis, Juan" Cc: akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6.x] additional kernel event notifications From: Andi Kleen Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 04:02:08 +0200 In-Reply-To: ("Villacis, Juan"'s message of "Fri, 19 Sep 2003 23:30:09 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.090013 (Oort Gnus v0.13) Emacs/21.2 (i586-suse-linux) References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1018 Lines: 24 "Villacis, Juan" writes: > The current event notifications used by tools like Oprofile, while quite > useful, are not sufficient. The additional event notifications we > propose can provide a more complete picture for performance tuning on > Linux, particularly for dynamically generated code (such as found in > Java). Can you explain why profiling dynamically generated code needs kernel support? The kernel should not know anything about this. The original oprofile patch also added similar hooks, but they were not merged. Instead the "dcookies" mechanism was added to assign samples to specific executables. Why can't you use the same mechanism? There is not more information in the kernel than what dcookies already provide. -Andi - 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/