Re: [RFC] perf/sdt: Directly record SDT event with 'perf record'

Em Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 01:43:38PM +0530, Ravi Bangoria escreveu: > Thanks Arnaldo, > > I'm working on this but it's taking bit longer time. Will post out a patch > within > few days. Take your time and thanks for giving consideration to my observations, Regards, - Arnaldo > Ravi > > On

Re: [RFC] perf/sdt: Directly record SDT event with 'perf record'

Em Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 01:43:38PM +0530, Ravi Bangoria escreveu: > Thanks Arnaldo, > > I'm working on this but it's taking bit longer time. Will post out a patch > within > few days. Take your time and thanks for giving consideration to my observations, Regards, - Arnaldo > Ravi > > On

Re: [RFC] perf/sdt: Directly record SDT event with 'perf record'

Thanks Arnaldo, I'm working on this but it's taking bit longer time. Will post out a patch within few days. Ravi On Monday 20 February 2017 07:41 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > Em Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 04:31:50PM +0530, Ravi Bangoria escreveu: >> Thanks Ingo, >> >> On Monday 20 February

Re: [RFC] perf/sdt: Directly record SDT event with 'perf record'

Thanks Arnaldo, I'm working on this but it's taking bit longer time. Will post out a patch within few days. Ravi On Monday 20 February 2017 07:41 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > Em Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 04:31:50PM +0530, Ravi Bangoria escreveu: >> Thanks Ingo, >> >> On Monday 20 February

Re: [RFC] perf/sdt: Directly record SDT event with 'perf record'

Em Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 04:31:50PM +0530, Ravi Bangoria escreveu: > Thanks Ingo, > > On Monday 20 February 2017 02:12 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Ravi Bangoria wrote: > > > >> What should be the behavior of the tool? Should it record only one > >>

Re: [RFC] perf/sdt: Directly record SDT event with 'perf record'

Em Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 04:31:50PM +0530, Ravi Bangoria escreveu: > Thanks Ingo, > > On Monday 20 February 2017 02:12 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Ravi Bangoria wrote: > > > >> What should be the behavior of the tool? Should it record only one > >> 'sdt_libpthread:mutex_entry' which exists in

Re: [RFC] perf/sdt: Directly record SDT event with 'perf record'

Thanks Ingo, On Monday 20 February 2017 02:12 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Ravi Bangoria wrote: > >> What should be the behavior of the tool? Should it record only one >> 'sdt_libpthread:mutex_entry' which exists in uprobe_events? Or it >> should record all the

Re: [RFC] perf/sdt: Directly record SDT event with 'perf record'

Thanks Ingo, On Monday 20 February 2017 02:12 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Ravi Bangoria wrote: > >> What should be the behavior of the tool? Should it record only one >> 'sdt_libpthread:mutex_entry' which exists in uprobe_events? Or it >> should record all the SDT events from libpthread? We can

Re: [RFC] perf/sdt: Directly record SDT event with 'perf record'

* Ravi Bangoria wrote: > Yes, initially I thought about allowing both, 'perf probe' and > 'perf record' for SDT event. But there are few complications with > it, esp. when multiple SDT events with same name exists. For ex, > > $ readelf -n

Re: [RFC] perf/sdt: Directly record SDT event with 'perf record'

* Ravi Bangoria wrote: > Yes, initially I thought about allowing both, 'perf probe' and > 'perf record' for SDT event. But there are few complications with > it, esp. when multiple SDT events with same name exists. For ex, > > $ readelf -n /usr/lib64/libpthread-2.24.so | grep -A2 Provider >

Re: [RFC] perf/sdt: Directly record SDT event with 'perf record'

On Monday 20 February 2017 12:38 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Ravi Bangoria wrote: > >> All events from 'perf list', except SDT events, can be directly recorded >> with 'perf record'. But, the flow is little different for SDT events. >> Probe point for SDT event

Re: [RFC] perf/sdt: Directly record SDT event with 'perf record'

On Monday 20 February 2017 12:38 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Ravi Bangoria wrote: > >> All events from 'perf list', except SDT events, can be directly recorded >> with 'perf record'. But, the flow is little different for SDT events. >> Probe point for SDT event needs to be created using 'perf

Re: [RFC] perf/sdt: Directly record SDT event with 'perf record'

* Ravi Bangoria wrote: > All events from 'perf list', except SDT events, can be directly recorded > with 'perf record'. But, the flow is little different for SDT events. > Probe point for SDT event needs to be created using 'perf probe' before > recording it

Re: [RFC] perf/sdt: Directly record SDT event with 'perf record'

* Ravi Bangoria wrote: > All events from 'perf list', except SDT events, can be directly recorded > with 'perf record'. But, the flow is little different for SDT events. > Probe point for SDT event needs to be created using 'perf probe' before > recording it using 'perf record'. > > As

[RFC] perf/sdt: Directly record SDT event with 'perf record'

All events from 'perf list', except SDT events, can be directly recorded with 'perf record'. But, the flow is little different for SDT events. Probe point for SDT event needs to be created using 'perf probe' before recording it using 'perf record'. As suggested by Ingo[1], it's better to make

[RFC] perf/sdt: Directly record SDT event with 'perf record'

All events from 'perf list', except SDT events, can be directly recorded with 'perf record'. But, the flow is little different for SDT events. Probe point for SDT event needs to be created using 'perf probe' before recording it using 'perf record'. As suggested by Ingo[1], it's better to make