Re: LTTng and SystemTAP (Everyone who is scared to read this huge thread, skip to here)

[Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca>]

* Ingo Molnar (mingo@elte.hu) wrote:
> 
> * Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca> wrote:
> 
> > > Some of the extensive hooking you do in LTT could be aleviated to a 
> > > great degree if you used dynamic probes. For example the syscall 
> > > entry hackery in LTT looks truly scary.
> > 
> > Yes, agreed. The last time I checked, I thought about moving this 
> > tracing code to the syscall_trace_entry/exit (used for security hooks 
> > and ptrace if I remember well). I just didn't have the time to do it 
> > yet.
> 
> correct, that's where all such things (auditing, seccomp, ptrace, 
> sigstop, freezing, etc.) hook into. Much (all?) of the current entry.S 
> hacks can go away in favor of a much easier .c patch to 
> do_syscall_trace() and this would reduce a significantion portion of the 
> present intrusiveness of LTTng.
> 

Hi Ingo,

The only problem with do_syscall_trace is that it is only called at the
beginning of the system call. LTT also needs a marker at the end of the system
call to know when the control went back to user space.

Any idea of a nice location (in C code preferably) for such a marker ?

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 majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/