Re: [RFC] Create instrumentation directory (git repository)

[Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>]

Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> I see no good reason to have so many different adhoc instrumentation
> mechanisms for profiling (sched, vm, oprofile) and tracing (blktrace,
> suspend/resume tracing) all over the place. Merging them in a single
> directory seems like a good step towards a more generic
> instrumentation/profiling/tracing infrastructure.

Moving files about in directories should be at the /lowest/ end of the 
priority scale.  It makes diffs unreadable, file histories and diffing 
difficult, and a host of other problems.

Please solve the /real/ problems, and then come back and clean up the 
file structure after that is done.  Massive file renaming to satisfying 
some imagined future everything-is-golden scheme is the /last/ step.  It 
is the last step taken because the previous steps inevitably give you 
guidance that you otherwise would not have had at the start of the task.

When I try to diff between old and new alpha oprofile code, I really 
want to know that the reason why diffing is a pain in the ass is more 
than "it seemed like a good first step."


> Back to "profile" and "probes" directory names, they might be short, but
> they do not represent the whole markup-profiling-tracing trio,
> "profile" lacks the tracing part and "probe" lacks the markup part.

You can always add more letters (and words) to even reach the desired 
level of specificity.  That does nothing to help readability though.

Anyway, it should be clear from existing precedent -- existing pathnames 
-- that "instrumentation" is too long, and really IMO too vague anyway.

	Jeff


-
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/