On 10/13/15 3:54 AM, He Kuang wrote:
If we want perf to reflect as soon as our sample event be generated,
--no-buffering should be used, but this option has a greater
impact on performance.
no_buffering doesn't have to be applied to all events obviously.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send
On 2015/10/13 18:54, He Kuang wrote:
hi, Alexei
What about using similar
implementation
like PERF_EVENT_IOC_SET_OUTPUT, creating a new ioctl like
PERF_EVENT_IOC_SET_ENABLER,
then let perf to select an event as 'enabler', then BPF can still
control one atomic
variable to enable/disable a set o
hi, Alexei
What about using similar
implementation
like PERF_EVENT_IOC_SET_OUTPUT, creating a new ioctl like
PERF_EVENT_IOC_SET_ENABLER,
then let perf to select an event as 'enabler', then BPF can still
control one atomic
variable to enable/disable a set of events.
you lost me on that last sen
On 2015/10/13 13:15, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
On 10/12/15 9:34 PM, Wangnan (F) wrote:
On 2015/10/13 12:16, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
On 10/12/15 8:51 PM, Wangnan (F) wrote:
why 'set disable' is needed ?
the example given in cover letter shows the use case where you want
to receive samples
On 10/12/15 9:34 PM, Wangnan (F) wrote:
On 2015/10/13 12:16, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
On 10/12/15 8:51 PM, Wangnan (F) wrote:
why 'set disable' is needed ?
the example given in cover letter shows the use case where you want
to receive samples only within sys_write() syscall.
The example make
On 2015/10/13 12:16, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
On 10/12/15 8:51 PM, Wangnan (F) wrote:
why 'set disable' is needed ?
the example given in cover letter shows the use case where you want
to receive samples only within sys_write() syscall.
The example makes sense, but sys_write() is running on th
On 10/12/15 8:51 PM, Wangnan (F) wrote:
why 'set disable' is needed ?
the example given in cover letter shows the use case where you want
to receive samples only within sys_write() syscall.
The example makes sense, but sys_write() is running on this cpu, so just
disabling it on the current one is
On 2015/10/13 11:39, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
On 10/12/15 8:27 PM, Wangnan (F) wrote:
Then how to avoid racing? For example, when one core disabling all
events
in a map, another core is enabling all of them. This racing may causes
sereval
perf events in a map dump samples while other events
On 10/12/15 8:27 PM, Wangnan (F) wrote:
Then how to avoid racing? For example, when one core disabling all events
in a map, another core is enabling all of them. This racing may causes
sereval
perf events in a map dump samples while other events not. To avoid such
racing
I think some locking must
On 2015/10/13 3:29, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
On 10/12/15 2:02 AM, Kaixu Xia wrote:
+extern const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_perf_event_sample_enable_proto;
+extern const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_perf_event_sample_disable_proto;
externs are unnecessary. Just make them static.
Also I prefer s
On 10/12/15 2:02 AM, Kaixu Xia wrote:
+extern const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_perf_event_sample_enable_proto;
+extern const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_perf_event_sample_disable_proto;
externs are unnecessary. Just make them static.
Also I prefer single helper that takes a flag, so we can extend
11 matches
Mail list logo
