Hi Michal,
Sorry for such a late reply, you sent this email to me at the worst
time. My wife was having shoulder surgery and I heading for a
conference. I fell very far behind in email and I only now just noticed
this.
I'll answer these ever though you may already figured it out.
On Mon, 2009-11-09 at 17:52 +0100, Michal Simek wrote:Hi Steve and others,
I have working dynamic ftrace function. :-)
I look at __ftrace_modify_code function and I have one question about.
Below are function which are called when I enable function_graph.
I personally think that make more sense to call ftrace_enable_ftrace_graph_caller before ftrace_update_ftrace_func.
The reason for it is that graph_caller enable calling graph tracing which should be setup before ftrace_update_ftrace_func which enable whole tracing function.
Have you seen any difference in output with this?
I never thought about this order too much.
-- Steve
# cd ; mkdir /debug; mount -t debugfs none /debug; cat /debug/tracing/available_tracers; echo function_graph > /debug/tracing/current_tracer;echo 0 > /debug/tra
cing/tracing_enabled;cat /debug/tracing/trace | head -n 10
function_graph function sched_switch nop
ftrace_update_ftrace_func 0xc0009100 0xc00091c4, 0xb000c000, 0x32809100
ftrace_enable_ftrace_graph_caller
# tracer: function_graph
For disabling graph trace is sequence ok I think.
# echo function > /debug/tracing/current_tracer
ftrace_disable_ftrace_graph_caller
ftrace_update_ftrace_func 0xc006afe4 0xc00091c4, 0xb000c006, 0x3280afe4
What do you think?
Thanks,
Michal