|| ||Andrew Morton <akpm-AT-linux-foundation.org> |
|| ||Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec-AT-gmail.com> |
|| ||Re: [PATCH 0/4] workqueue_tracepoint: Add worklet tracepoints for
worklet lifecycle tracing |
|| ||Fri, 24 Apr 2009 16:20:56 -0700|
|| ||zhaolei-AT-cn.fujitsu.com, mingo-AT-elte.hu,
tzanussi-AT-gmail.com, linux-kernel-AT-vger.kernel.org, oleg-AT-redhat.com|
|| ||Article, Thread
On Sat, 25 Apr 2009 00:59:10 +0200
Frederic Weisbecker <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> [useful info]
OK, thanks. It was waaaay more useful than the original description.
> So this latest patchset provides all these required informations on the events
> tracing level.
Well.. required by who?
I don't recall ever seeing any problems of this nature, nor patches to
solve any such problems. If someone wants to get down and optimise our use
of workqueues then good for them, but that exercise doesn't require the
permanent addition of large amounts of code to the kernel.
The same amount of additional code and additional churn could be added
to probably tens of core kernel subsystems, but what _point_ is there
to all this? Who is using it, what problems are they solving?
We keep on adding all these fancy debug gizmos to the core kernel which look
like they will be used by one person, once. If that!
> The next step is likely to be on the stat tracing to provide the avg/max time
> of execution.
to post comments)