* Mathieu Desnoyers <[email protected]> wrote:
> * 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.
djprobes?
> > > 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)."
i missed that (way too many mails in this thread).
Here is how i counted them:
$ grep "\<trace_.*(" * | wc -l
359
some of those are not true tracepoints, but there's at least this many
of them:
$ grep "\<trace_.*(" *instrumentation* | wc -l
235
so the real number is somewhere between.
patch-2.6.17-lttng-0.5.108-instrumentation-arm.diff
patch-2.6.17-lttng-0.5.108-instrumentation.diff
patch-2.6.17-lttng-0.5.108-instrumentation-i386.diff
patch-2.6.17-lttng-0.5.108-instrumentation-mips.diff
patch-2.6.17-lttng-0.5.108-instrumentation-powerpc.diff
patch-2.6.17-lttng-0.5.108-instrumentation-ppc.diff
patch-2.6.17-lttng-0.5.108-instrumentation-s390.diff
patch-2.6.17-lttng-0.5.108-instrumentation-sh.diff
patch-2.6.17-lttng-0.5.108-instrumentation-x86_64.diff
when judging kernel maintainance overhead, the sum of all patches
matters. And i considered all the other patches too (the ones that add
actual tracepoints) that will come after the currently offered ones, not
just the ones you submitted to lkml.
Ingo
-
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]
