Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751726AbYKKSn1 (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Nov 2008 13:43:27 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750929AbYKKSnS (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Nov 2008 13:43:18 -0500 Received: from mx3.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.1.138]:37148 "EHLO mx3.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750874AbYKKSnS (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Nov 2008 13:43:18 -0500 Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 19:43:12 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Fr=E9d=E9ric?= Weisbecker Cc: Steven Rostedt , Linux Kernel Subject: Re: [RFC v3][PATCH 0/2] Make ftrace able to trace function return Message-ID: <20081111184311.GA21151@elte.hu> References: <49191C31.1050402@gmail.com> <20081111094312.GA16496@elte.hu> <20081111171455.GA8201@elte.hu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamScore: -1.5 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-1.5 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00,DNS_FROM_SECURITYSAGE autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.3 -1.5 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] 0.0 DNS_FROM_SECURITYSAGE RBL: Envelope sender in blackholes.securitysage.com Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1404 Lines: 35 * Fr?d?ric Weisbecker wrote: > > at the risk of bikeshed-painting this issue too much, the problem > > with function_return is that it has little meaning to actual users > > and even to developers. What does the "return" mean? We know what > > it means, because we know that opposed to function entry we'll > > also capture function returns, and hence be able to do full > > function call tracing. > > > > so function_full i thought to conduct this aspect of it better. > > But suggestions are welcome. > > > Ok. Let's change into function_full, after all, I think that this > tool will be mostly used with a parsing pass of its traces with a > script to produce statistics and hierarchical representation like > does draw_functrace.py After that, the order of apparition of the > functions in the trace will not really matter. how about function_cost ? that's what it's primarily about at this stage: the ability to capture entry+exit, and have the cost printed. as opposed to function tracer, which traces function entry events, but does not try to build a coherent picture about per function execution cost. Ingo -- 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/