This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the systemtap project.
Re: Systemtap for NFSv4
- From: Trond Myklebust <trond dot myklebust at fys dot uio dot no>
- To: Gerrit Huizenga <gh at us dot ibm dot com>
- Cc: Tony Reix <tony dot reix at bull dot net>, Li Guanglei <guanglei at cn dot ibm dot com>, Vara Prasad <varap at us dot ibm dot com>, Jose Santos <jrs at us dot ibm dot com>, "systemtap at sourceware dot org" <systemtap at sourceware dot org>, xuepengl at cn dot ibm dot com
- Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 12:10:55 -0400
- Subject: Re: Systemtap for NFSv4
- References: <E1GFusv-0006n3-BP@w-gerrit.beaverton.ibm.com>
On Wed, 2006-08-23 at 08:43 -0700, Gerrit Huizenga wrote:
> Trond, Trond, Trond: My answers are basically pfeh, Pfeh, and PFEH!
"...Your mother was a hamster, and your father smelt of ELDERBERRIES!"
(Monty Python's Search for the Holy Grail)
> Comments interspersed...
Ah, but you appear to be missing an important point. Tony was asking if
we wanted to _replace_ the current set of dprintk()s with systemtap. I'm
just saying that I'm not going to start throwing dprintks until we have
a viable replacement. SystemTap is not (yet?) convincing as a candidate
for that role.
Note: if we do want to replace dprintks with SystemTap, then I think
that another precondition would be that we include the main systemtap
debugging scripts in Linus' tree.
> On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 17:17:52 +0200, Tony Reix wrote:
> > Hello,
> > Can you answer the following questions asked by Trond Myklebust (NFSv4
> > client) ?
> > Thanks,
> > Tony
> > I see several conditions that would need to be fulfilled before we even
> > start to consider that:
> > 1) SystemTap would have to go into most (all?) distributions.
> Getting there. Why wait. Just like all other things open-source,
> get in on the development, be one of the first to use cool toys,
> and YES, systemtap is heading there. And, if you find a distro that
> doesn't have it, ask here and suggest they include it. This is OPEN
> source, after all. ;-)
> > 2) There must be support for _all_ processor architectures: I'm not
> > sure that they all have kprobes support for instance.
> Oh, you know better than that! All 38 processor architectures (okay,
> I forgot the actual number)? Again, when you find one that doesn't
> work, let the arch maintainers know. kprobes supports most of the
> mainstream archs today, nothing fundamental standing in the way of
> SystemTap supporting all of those. When you find one that you care
> about that doesn't work, let this list or the arch maintainer know.
> > 3) The NFS code would have to stabilise considerably: if the code to be
> > debugged keeps moving around, then maintaining a parallel set of
> > SystemTap scripts would be a nightmare.
> SystemTap can help stabilize the code! It gives end users the ability
> to help debug things without having your genius downloaded into their
> Treo. You'll get more intelligent bug reports and can ask for more
> detail as generated by SystemTap. Win-Win, I say!