This is the mail archive of the
systemtap@sourceware.org
mailing list for the systemtap project.
Re: Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] Support for perf to probe into SDT markers:
- From: Masami Hiramatsu <masami dot hiramatsu dot pt at hitachi dot com>
- To: Pekka Enberg <penberg at iki dot fi>
- Cc: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com>, Hemant Kumar <hkshaw at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com>, LKML <linux-kernel at vger dot kernel dot org>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz at infradead dot org>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg at redhat dot com>, hegdevasant at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com, Ingo Molnar <mingo at redhat dot com>, anton at redhat dot com, systemtap at sourceware dot org, Namhyung Kim <namhyung at kernel dot org>, aravinda at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com
- Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2013 12:19:37 +0900
- Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] Support for perf to probe into SDT markers:
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20131023044511 dot 1886 dot 82571 dot stgit at hemant-fedora> <20131023050502 dot 1886 dot 15779 dot stgit at hemant-fedora> <CAOJsxLFKm3TxeTmGjbpr1r4sZ8fHcM481-5BM_Cq0J8hhtvBqQ at mail dot gmail dot com> <526E4940 dot 8000608 at hitachi dot com> <526E5BA5 dot 7050103 at iki dot fi> <20131028141152 dot GA1040 at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com> <526E72EC dot 9060400 at iki dot fi> <20131028173152 dot GB1040 at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com> <526EA366 dot 4020204 at iki dot fi>
(2013/10/29 2:48), Pekka Enberg wrote:
> On 10/28/13 7:31 PM, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
>>>> But what if a system has both 32 bit libc and 64 bit libc?
>>>> Wont we could end up with 2 libc:setjmp?
>>>> Should we give some more intelligence into perf to choose the 64 bit
>>>> libc over 32 bit one?
>>> You can just trace both of them by default, no?
>>>
>> There has to be a one to one association with the event name and its
>> mapping. Every event name will finally map to a unique inode and an
>> offset.
>>
>> One option would be for perf to look at these markers and have a
>> different event name for similar markers in different executables.
>
> I think we are talking past each other here.
>
> Yes, I understand that you need an fully qualified name
> for a SDT marker but there's absolutely no reason to force
> feed that to the user of 'perf trace'.
>
> For the 32-bit and 64-bit libc case, why cannot 'perf list'
> by default print out something like:
>
> $ perf list
>
> libc:setjmp [SDT marker group]
>
> and provide a '--fully-qualified' command line option that:
>
> $ perf list --fully-qualified
>
> libc:setjmp => libc32:setjmp, libc64:setjmp [SDT marker group]
> libc32:setjmp => libc:setjmp@/lib/libc.so.6 [SDT marker]
> libc64:setjmp => libc:setjmp@/lib64/libc.so.6 [SDT marker]
>
> and then teach 'perf trace' to deal with SDT marker groups
> where you trace two events, not one?
Ah, that's a good idea. :)
And it also is needed for another probe event because
sometimes inlined functions have multiple instances.
I'd like to fold them as one event group.
Thank you!
--
Masami HIRAMATSU
IT Management Research Dept. Linux Technology Center
Hitachi, Ltd., Yokohama Research Laboratory
E-mail: masami.hiramatsu.pt@hitachi.com