Re: [PATCH net-next 0/8] allow bpf attach to tracepoints

On 4/18/16 1:47 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote: On Mon, 18 Apr 2016 12:51:43 -0700 Alexei Starovoitov wrote: yeah, it could be added to ftrace as well, but it won't be as effective as perf_trace, since the cost of trace_event_buffer_reserve() in trace_event_raw_event_() handler is

Re: [PATCH net-next 0/8] allow bpf attach to tracepoints

On 4/18/16 1:47 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote: On Mon, 18 Apr 2016 12:51:43 -0700 Alexei Starovoitov wrote: yeah, it could be added to ftrace as well, but it won't be as effective as perf_trace, since the cost of trace_event_buffer_reserve() in trace_event_raw_event_() handler is significantly

Re: [PATCH net-next 0/8] allow bpf attach to tracepoints

On Mon, 18 Apr 2016 12:51:43 -0700 Alexei Starovoitov wrote: > yeah, it could be added to ftrace as well, but it won't be as effective > as perf_trace, since the cost of trace_event_buffer_reserve() in > trace_event_raw_event_() handler is significantly higher than >

Re: [PATCH net-next 0/8] allow bpf attach to tracepoints

On Mon, 18 Apr 2016 12:51:43 -0700 Alexei Starovoitov wrote: > yeah, it could be added to ftrace as well, but it won't be as effective > as perf_trace, since the cost of trace_event_buffer_reserve() in > trace_event_raw_event_() handler is significantly higher than > perf_trace_buf_alloc() in

Re: [PATCH net-next 0/8] allow bpf attach to tracepoints

On 4/18/16 9:13 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote: On Mon, 4 Apr 2016 21:52:46 -0700 Alexei Starovoitov wrote: Hi Steven, Peter, last time we discussed bpf+tracepoints it was a year ago [1] and the reason we didn't proceed with that approach was that bpf would make arguments arg1, arg2

Re: [PATCH net-next 0/8] allow bpf attach to tracepoints

On 4/18/16 9:13 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote: On Mon, 4 Apr 2016 21:52:46 -0700 Alexei Starovoitov wrote: Hi Steven, Peter, last time we discussed bpf+tracepoints it was a year ago [1] and the reason we didn't proceed with that approach was that bpf would make arguments arg1, arg2 to

Re: [PATCH net-next 0/8] allow bpf attach to tracepoints

On Mon, 4 Apr 2016 21:52:46 -0700 Alexei Starovoitov wrote: > Hi Steven, Peter, > > last time we discussed bpf+tracepoints it was a year ago [1] and the reason > we didn't proceed with that approach was that bpf would make arguments > arg1, arg2 to trace_xx(arg1, arg2) call to be

Re: [PATCH net-next 0/8] allow bpf attach to tracepoints

On Mon, 4 Apr 2016 21:52:46 -0700 Alexei Starovoitov wrote: > Hi Steven, Peter, > > last time we discussed bpf+tracepoints it was a year ago [1] and the reason > we didn't proceed with that approach was that bpf would make arguments > arg1, arg2 to trace_xx(arg1, arg2) call to be exposed to bpf

[PATCH net-next 0/8] allow bpf attach to tracepoints

Hi Steven, Peter, last time we discussed bpf+tracepoints it was a year ago [1] and the reason we didn't proceed with that approach was that bpf would make arguments arg1, arg2 to trace_xx(arg1, arg2) call to be exposed to bpf program and that was considered unnecessary extension of abi. Back then

[PATCH net-next 0/8] allow bpf attach to tracepoints

Hi Steven, Peter, last time we discussed bpf+tracepoints it was a year ago [1] and the reason we didn't proceed with that approach was that bpf would make arguments arg1, arg2 to trace_xx(arg1, arg2) call to be exposed to bpf program and that was considered unnecessary extension of abi. Back then