RE: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH] add long interrupt measurement capability

[Ian Pratt <Ian.Pratt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> Perhaps.  However measuring cycles is important and, more
> specifically, measuring MAX cycles spent across a set of
> interrupts.  As a result, I suspect any code that measures
> this (regardless of whether the result is reported by
> xentrace or debug-key) would likely encounter the
> same objection from Keir.

I can't imagine there'd be any objection to adding trace macros to record this. 
The xentrace log processing tool can then be updated to generate max or 
histogram values.

Ian 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dulloor [mailto:dulloor@xxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Thursday, May 07, 2009 6:14 PM
> To: Keir Fraser
> Cc: Dan Magenheimer; Xen-Devel (E-mail)
> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH] add long interrupt measurement
> capability
> 
> 
> Dan, Couldn't you add this to xentrace ?
> 
> -dulloor
> 
> 
> On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 2:03 PM, Keir Fraser
> <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> On 29/04/2009 17:50, "Dan Magenheimer" <dan.magenheimer@xxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
> 
> > Since I see you are still taking boot-option patches
> > for 3.4, I thought I'd retry this one which optionally
> > measures cycles spent in each irq.  I thought
> > you had just decided it was too late for 3.4... if
> > you rejected it for another reason, please let me
> > know.
> 
> 
> I don't think it has sufficient general utility to be applied. Anyone
> who
> would actually have the want and wit to run this option can apply the
> patch
> themselves.
> 
>  -- Keir
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel