On Sat, 2006-09-30 at 14:01 -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Following the huge discussion thread about tracing/static vs dynamic
> instrumentation/markers, a consensus seems to emerge about the need for a
> marker system in the Linux kernel. The main issues this mechanism addresses are:
>
> - Identify code important to runtime data collection/analysis tools in tree so
> that it follows the code changes naturally.
> - Be visually appealing to kernel developers.
> - Have a very low impact on the system performance.
> - Integrate in the standard kernel infrastructure : use C and loadable modules.
>
> The time has come for some performance measurements of the Linux Kernel Markers,
> which follows. I attach a PDF with tables and charts which condense these
> results.
Has anyone done any performance measurements with the "regular function
call replaced by a NOP" type of marker?
--
Nicholas Miell <[email protected]>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
