On Wed, 20 Mar 2024 20:46:11 -0400
Waiman Long wrote:
> I have no objection to that. However, there are now 2 function call
> overhead in each iteration if either CONFIG_IRQSOFF_TRACER or
> CONFIG_PREEMPT_TRACER is on. Is it possible to do it with just one
> function call? IOW, make
On 3/20/24 12:20, Steven Rostedt wrote:
From: Steven Rostedt (Google)
I'm debugging some latency issues on a Chromebook and the preemptirqsoff
tracer hit this:
# tracer: preemptirqsoff
#
# preemptirqsoff latency trace v1.1.5 on 5.15.148-21853-g165fd2387469-dirty
#
On 2024-03-20 13:58, Steven Rostedt wrote:
On Wed, 20 Mar 2024 13:15:39 -0400
Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
I would like to introduce restart_critical_timings() and place it in
locations that have this behavior.
Is there any way you could move this to need_resched() rather than
sprinkle those
On Wed, 20 Mar 2024 13:15:39 -0400
Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> > I would like to introduce restart_critical_timings() and place it in
> > locations that have this behavior.
>
> Is there any way you could move this to need_resched() rather than
> sprinkle those everywhere ?
Because
On 2024-03-20 12:20, Steven Rostedt wrote:
From: Steven Rostedt (Google)
I'm debugging some latency issues on a Chromebook and the preemptirqsoff
tracer hit this:
# tracer: preemptirqsoff
#
# preemptirqsoff latency trace v1.1.5 on 5.15.148-21853-g165fd2387469-dirty
#
From: Steven Rostedt (Google)
I'm debugging some latency issues on a Chromebook and the preemptirqsoff
tracer hit this:
# tracer: preemptirqsoff
#
# preemptirqsoff latency trace v1.1.5 on 5.15.148-21853-g165fd2387469-dirty
#
#
6 matches
Mail list logo
