Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756419Ab1BRPHv (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Feb 2011 10:07:51 -0500 Received: from hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com ([71.74.56.122]:47812 "EHLO hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756190Ab1BRPHp (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Feb 2011 10:07:45 -0500 X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.1 cv=3uSaImBeuprzHBlOOPjkqgu+7PcxSRW0m2Aphm9Zmck= c=1 sm=0 a=JGpTz_e83PYA:10 a=Q9fys5e9bTEA:10 a=OPBmh+XkhLl+Enan7BmTLg==:17 a=mpsSxIc6-QBJ2jH1_FoA:9 a=sWOljSyASkJKS6__GB0A:7 a=cQTP_8tpQS3lvqTEFvPIsCGeFj0A:4 a=PUjeQqilurYA:10 a=OPBmh+XkhLl+Enan7BmTLg==:117 X-Cloudmark-Score: 0 X-Originating-IP: 67.242.120.143 Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/4] ftrace: Use -mfentry when supported (this is for x86_64 right now) From: Steven Rostedt To: Masami Hiramatsu Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar , Andrew Morton , Thomas Gleixner , Frederic Weisbecker , "H. Peter Anvin" , Mathieu Desnoyers , Andi Kleen , 2nddept-manager@sdl.hitachi.co.jp In-Reply-To: <4D5E5BCF.1040509@hitachi.com> References: <20110209200249.111932716@goodmis.org> <4D5D1672.6070206@hitachi.com> <1297948703.23343.907.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> <4D5D4013.4070602@hitachi.com> <1297957591.23343.921.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> <4D5D47C0.9020206@hitachi.com> <1297973501.23343.953.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> <4D5E5BCF.1040509@hitachi.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-15" Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2011 10:07:39 -0500 Message-ID: <1298041659.23343.956.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.30.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1381 Lines: 33 On Fri, 2011-02-18 at 20:45 +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > (2011/02/18 5:11), Steven Rostedt wrote: > > On Fri, 2011-02-18 at 01:07 +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > > > >> I just thought that frequent stop-machine is not so good from the user's > >> POV. I agree that disabled probe ignoring the call is enough. > >> Maybe, it could be done with the similar mechanism of jump optimization. > > > > I thought jump optimization still calls stop_machine too? > > Yes, but now it does batch optimization. > Even if hundreds kprobes are registered separately, jump optimization > has been done in background with a stop_machine per every 256 probes. > (Until optimizing, kprobes can use breakpoints instead) But a single optimized kprobe still must use stopmachine. But it is true that the function tracer does it as one big shot. That is, it will do all functions in a single stop machine that needs to be changed. It too is batched, but there is not a limit to that batch. I would be interested in hearing from users and real use cases that someone would like to trace functions but stopmachine is too big of a hammer. -- Steve -- 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/