Re: [PATCH] new irq tracer

[KOSAKI Motohiro]

> > > Given this scenario :
> > > 
> > > A telecommunication system runs, but the client notices 
> > something wrong.
> > > They call their service provider. The provider enables tracing 
> > > _remotely_ on the _production system_ while it's _active in 
> > the field_.
> > > 
> > > Bam, those few milliseconds interrupt latencies become unacceptable.
> > > 
> > > Hopefully this scenario makes the use-case clearer. The 
> > problem is not 
> > > that interrupt latencies would occur while tracing is on, 
> > but rather 
> > > that it would happen on a running production system when switching 
> > > tracing on. This is what is totally unacceptable for this use-case.
> > > 
> > > For more details about such requirements, I'm CCing 
> > Dominique Toupin 
> > > from Ericsson who I'm sure would be happy to give more 
> > details about 
> > > this if needed.
> > 
> > Hmm, so this system in the field is running Linux with the 
> > Real-Time Patch?  Because if it isn't it will suffer from 
> > millisecond latencies in normal operation.
>
> In many cases we don't use Linux real-time, we have many systems that
> are soft-real-time an non real-time Linux is good enough.
>  

Agreed, rt-patch seems off topics. we discuss to mainline kernel.

Steven, I sitll think nobody use ftrace on production system now yet.
Do you know actual production user?




--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/