Adrian Bunk <[email protected]> writes:
> [...]
> profiling = debugging of performance problems
Indeed.
> My words were perhaps a bit sloppy, but profiling isn't part of
> normal operation and if people use a separate kernel for such
> purposes we don't need infrastructure for reducing performance
> penalties of enabled debug options.
Things are not so simple. One might not know that one has a
performance problem until one tries some analysis tools. Rebooting
into different kernels just to investigate does not work generally:
the erroneous phenomenon may have been short lived; the debug kernel,
being "only" for debugging, may not be well tested => sufficiently
trustworthy.
Your question asking for an actual performance impact of dormant hooks
is OTOH entirely legitimate. It clearly depends on the placement of
those hooks and thus their encounter rate, more so than their
underlying technology (markers with whatever optimizations). If the
cost is small enough, you will likely find that people will be willing
to pay a small fraction of average performance, in order to eke out
large gains when finding occasional e.g. algorithmic bugs.
- FChE
-
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]
