Philippe Gerum wrote: > Jan Kiszka wrote: > >> Hi again, >> >> here comes the first update of the new latency tracer. >> >> arch/i386/kernel/entry.S | 27 +++ > > > Is there any good reason to patch the callers of __ipipe_handle_irq > instead of instrumenting the callee directly? >
To capture the invocation delay of __ipipe_handle_irq itself. >> arch/i386/kernel/ipipe-root.c | 4 >> include/asm-i386/system.h | 70 +++++++++ >> include/linux/ipipe_trace.h | 3 >> kernel/ipipe/Kconfig | 18 ++ >> kernel/ipipe/tracer.c | 247 +++++++++++++++++++++++----------- >> 6 files changed, 288 insertions(+), 81 deletions(-) >> > > Meanwhile I found a solution for the described unterminated trace (put an explicite trace_end at the end of __ipipe_unstall_iret_root), included the irq number in the begin/end report, and stumbled over some other remaining unterminated trace on a different machine. So, no need to hurry with the merge (not the review! ;) ), I will publish a second revision first. Jan
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Xenomai-core mailing list Xenomai-core@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-core
