* David Smith (dsmith@redhat.com) wrote:
Mathieu,
Now that the markers facility itself has made it in the kernel, do you
have plans on trying to send patches that actually use markers to lkml?
For systemtap's use, we'd like to get some actual markers in the
upstream kernel. Off the top of my head, we might start with adding
markers to system calls (sys_*) that contain the system call's argument(s).
Hi David,
Yes, we have something similar in LTTng, we instrument many widely used
system calls to get the detailed arguments.
Do you want to start having a look at my instrumentation patchset ?
Those are the
lttng-instrumentation-*.patch patches available in the following
tarball:
http://ltt.polymtl.ca/lttng/patch-2.6.23-mm1-lttng-0.10-pre8.tar.bz2
The patches that you may find interesting to comment are :
lttng-kernel-trace-thread-flag-*
These patches adds a thread flag for kernel wide syscall trace
activation.
Note that I would gladly accept some help with the
lttng-kernel-trace-thread-flag-ia64.patch
lttng-kernel-trace-thread-flag-s390.patch
lttng-instrumentation-s390.patch
They need to add the 9th bit of thread flag that has to be checked by
a 8 bit limited instruction on these architectures.
lttng-instrumentation-*
Actual markers. It also includes assembly code change to use the
thread flags for syscall_trace.
Some architectures do not have complete architecture specific marker
set complete.
It's a good thing that we start having a discussion about these marker
sites at this point.
Mathieu