Re: [patch 2/9] LTTng instrumentation - irq

[Ingo Molnar]

* Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> If we want to do this logically, without thinking about tracer 
> performance impact, we could/should do :
> 
> trace_irq_entry(irqno, pt_regs)
>   for_each_handler() {
>     trace_irq_handler_entry(action)
>     action->handler()
>     trace_irq_handler_exit(ret)
>   }
> trace_irq_exit(retval)

Not really.

As i said, the handler invocation should be thought of separately 
from vectored IRQs. A device IRQ handler can be invoked in a number 
of non-vectored ways: it can be called in an IRQ thread for example. 
(there are other invocation modes possible too)

For IRQ vectors, the 'retval' makes little sense - so the exit event 
can be left out.

Which leaves us with what i suggested: to add an IRQ vector entry 
event on top of Jason's (already integrated) patches.

Hm?

	Ingo
--
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/