Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754894AbYGWJyw (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Jul 2008 05:54:52 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752614AbYGWJyn (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Jul 2008 05:54:43 -0400 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([18.85.46.34]:46286 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752400AbYGWJyn (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Jul 2008 05:54:43 -0400 Subject: Re: [patch 4/4] KVM-trace port to tracepoints From: Peter Zijlstra To: Avi Kivity Cc: Jan Kiszka , Mathieu Desnoyers , akpm@linux-foundation.org, Ingo Molnar , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, "Feng(Eric) Liu" In-Reply-To: <4886FA97.40104@qumranet.com> References: <20080717155724.897537670@polymtl.ca> <20080717160003.359557938@polymtl.ca> <487F7800.4010502@siemens.com> <20080717172853.GB29855@Krystal> <488604F8.1040008@siemens.com> <48862B01.7070907@qumranet.com> <1216799346.7257.125.camel@twins> <4886E6FD.4090200@qumranet.com> <1216803303.7257.138.camel@twins> <4886FA97.40104@qumranet.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2008 11:53:54 +0200 Message-Id: <1216806834.7257.156.camel@twins> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.22.3.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1412 Lines: 39 On Wed, 2008-07-23 at 12:32 +0300, Avi Kivity wrote: > Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > There are currently no trace_mark() sites in the kernel that I'm aware > > of (except for the scheduler :-/, and those should be converted to > > tracepoints ASAP). > > > > Andrew raised the whole point about trace_mark() generating an > > user-visible interface and thus it should be stable, and I agree with > > that. > > > > What that means is that trace_mark() can only be used for really stable > > points. > > > > This in turn means we might as well use trace points. > > > > Which allows for the conclusion that trace_mark() is not needed and > > could be removed from the kernel. > > > > However - it might be handy for ad-hoc debugging purposes that never see > > the light of day (linus' git tree in this case). So on those grounds one > > could argue against removing trace_mark > > But trace_mark() is so wonderful. I guess tastes differ... > Can't we just declare the tracemarks > as a non-stable interface? > > Perhaps add an unstable_trace_mark() to make it clear. At the very least it would need its own output channel. But I'm afraid this will be KS material. -- 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/