Please Ingo, stop repeating false argument without taking in account people's
corrections :
* Ingo Molnar ([email protected]) wrote:
> sorry, but i disagree. There _is_ a solution that is superior in every
> aspect: kprobes + SystemTap. (or any other equivalent dynamic tracer)
>
I am sorry to have to repeat myself, but this is not true for heavy loads.
> > At this point you've been rather uncompromising [...]
>
> yes, i'm rather uncompromising when i sense attempts to push inferior
> concepts into the core kernel _when_ a better concept exists here and
> today. Especially if the concept being pushed adds more than 350
> tracepoints that expose something to user-space that amounts to a
> complex external API, which tracepoints we have little chance of ever
> getting rid of under a static tracing concept.
>
>From an earlier email from Tim bird :
"I still think that this is off-topic for the patch posted. I think we
should debate the implementation of tracepoints/markers when someone posts a
patch for some. I think it's rather scurrilous to complain about
code NOT submitted. Ingo has even mis-characterized the not-submitted
instrumentation patch, by saying it has 350 tracepoints when it has no
such thing. I counted 58 for one architecture (with only 8 being
arch-specific)."
Mathieu
OpenPGP public key: http://krystal.dyndns.org:8080/key/compudj.gpg
Key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
