Re: Too many PMC implementations

To: Kamil Rytarowski <n54%gmx.com@localhost>
Subject: Re: Too many PMC implementations
From: Jason Thorpe <thorpej%me.com@localhost>
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2018 08:55:21 -0700

> On Aug 17, 2018, at 8:42 AM, Kamil Rytarowski <n54%gmx.com@localhost> wrote:
> 
> Speaking realistically, probably all the recent software-based kernel
> profiling was done with DTrace.

Yah, I suppose I'm okay will killing off kernel GPROF support ... you can essentially do the same-thing-but-better with an on-cpu flame graph generated from dtrace data.  If the lower-tier platforms don't support this properly, the energy should go towards fixing that.

-- thorpej

References:
- Too many PMC implementations
  - From: Maxime Villard
- Re: Too many PMC implementations
  - From: Maxime Villard
- Re: Too many PMC implementations
  - From: Maxime Villard
- Re: Too many PMC implementations
  - From: Joerg Sonnenberger
- Re: Too many PMC implementations
  - From: Maxime Villard
- Re: Too many PMC implementations
  - From: Kamil Rytarowski

Prev by Date: Re: Too many PMC implementations
Next by Date: Re: panic: biodone2 already
Previous by Thread: Re: Too many PMC implementations
Next by Thread: Re: Too many PMC implementations
Indexes:

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index