And it doesn't address the following issues: a) The static community providing actual evidence that dynamic tracing is noticably slower.
...
Everything has performance limitations, you keep running around touting that static is the only thing thats not a problem. Now show us the numbers!
When comparing two different approaches to a problem, it is unreasonable and disingenuous to try to force the onus on the proponents of one particular approach to do all the benchmarking for both sides. Everybody has to help try to find the correct solution. Furthermore, Mathieu already did provide numbers, if you go back and look.
The problems pointed out with LTT are *conceptual*, but of course you keep ignoring the facts and refusing to provide real numbers.
This is getting very silly, and unnecessarily abusive. Real problems exist on both sides of the fence, which have been discussed ad nauseam. If you don't recall them, then go back and read the thread again. The question is how to strike a comprimise between two different set of problems, which Ingo and Karim actually seemed to be making progress on towards the end of the thread. M. - 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/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH 0/11] LTTng-core (basic tracing infrastructure) 0.5.108
- From: Jes Sorensen <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 0/11] LTTng-core (basic tracing infrastructure) 0.5.108
- References:
- Re: [PATCH 0/11] LTTng-core (basic tracing infrastructure) 0.5.108
- From: Paul Mundt <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 0/11] LTTng-core (basic tracing infrastructure) 0.5.108
- From: Roman Zippel <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 0/11] LTTng-core (basic tracing infrastructure) 0.5.108
- From: Paul Mundt <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 0/11] LTTng-core (basic tracing infrastructure) 0.5.108
- From: Karim Yaghmour <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 0/11] LTTng-core (basic tracing infrastructure) 0.5.108
- From: Jes Sorensen <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 0/11] LTTng-core (basic tracing infrastructure) 0.5.108
- From: Karim Yaghmour <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 0/11] LTTng-core (basic tracing infrastructure) 0.5.108
- From: Paul Mundt <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 0/11] LTTng-core (basic tracing infrastructure) 0.5.108
- From: Karim Yaghmour <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 0/11] LTTng-core (basic tracing infrastructure) 0.5.108
- From: Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 0/11] LTTng-core (basic tracing infrastructure) 0.5.108
- From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 0/11] LTTng-core (basic tracing infrastructure) 0.5.108
- From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 0/11] LTTng-core (basic tracing infrastructure) 0.5.108
- From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 0/11] LTTng-core (basic tracing infrastructure) 0.5.108
- From: Jes Sorensen <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 0/11] LTTng-core (basic tracing infrastructure) 0.5.108
- From: Karim Yaghmour <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 0/11] LTTng-core (basic tracing infrastructure) 0.5.108
- From: Jes Sorensen <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 0/11] LTTng-core (basic tracing infrastructure) 0.5.108
- Prev by Date: RE: TCP stack behaviour question
- Next by Date: Re: The emperor is naked: why *comprehensive* static markup belongs in mainline
- Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH 0/11] LTTng-core (basic tracing infrastructure) 0.5.108
- Next by thread: Re: [PATCH 0/11] LTTng-core (basic tracing infrastructure) 0.5.108
- Index(es):