Re: Unified tracing buffer

[Steven Rostedt]

On Fri, 19 Sep 2008, Martin Bligh wrote:

> >> Sorry, probably lots of implicit assumptions in there that I forgot to explain
> >
> > Ids for event types. Either allocated dynamically, if the tracer needs
> > new ids on each use, or statically assigned for others (like my fctrace
> > or Steven's ftrace, I believe). Should we have a reserved range / registry
> > for static allocation, maybe something like a very simple version of
> > devices.txt?
> 
> Sure, but it's per-tracer, so hopefully won't be a big problem (eg fctrace
> would have a different event-id namespace from blktrace)
> 

Right!

 We stated in our little meeting that the true event id association is 
buffer id / event id tuple. We will not be assigning ranges for events 
for specific tracers. Ftrace will not have its own range. The static ids 
are reserved for the static trace points and some various static trace 
types that the average kernel developer may use.

Think "string event type" for a event type that will simply hold an ASCII 
string.

-- Steve

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/