Re: [Patch] mm tracepoints

[Larry Woodman]

On Fri, 2009-03-06 at 19:01 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, 2009-03-06 at 18:38 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2009-03-06 at 18:10 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > > Looks pretty good and useful to me. I've Cc:-ed more mm folks, 
> > > > it would be nice to hear their opinion about these tracepoints.
> > > > 
> > > > Andrew, Nick, Peter, what do you think?
> > > 
> > > Bit sad we use the struct mm_struct * as mm identifier (little %lx vs %p
> > > confusion there too), but I suppose there simply isn't anything better.
> > 
> > > Things missing, 
> > 
> > Why only anon and filemap, that misses out on all the funky 
> > driver ->fault() handlers.
> 
> btw., does it include shm faults? I think all of this would be 
> handled if the tracepoint was at handle_mm_fault(), right?

The problem with this approach is you cant tell what kind of fault is
being encountered and how it will be handled until you are way down in
the functions that I added the tracepoints in...

The value of these tracepoint is the data you get from they are
currently located.

Larry

> 
> 	Ingo

--
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/