This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the systemtap project.
Re: (forw) [email@example.com: Re: [PATCH 0/11] LTTng-core (basic tracing infrastructure) 0.5.108]
- From: William Cohen <wcohen at redhat dot com>
- To: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu dot desnoyers at polymtl dot ca>
- Cc: Elena Zannoni <ezannoni at redhat dot com>, "systemtap at sourceware dot org" <systemtap at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2006 14:40:46 -0400
- Subject: Re: (forw) [firstname.lastname@example.org: Re: [PATCH 0/11] LTTng-core (basic tracing infrastructure) 0.5.108]
- References: <20060914182258.GA28688@Krystal>
Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
I just posted a reduced LTTng-core version of my tracer to LKML (without any
instrumentation, trying to get only the tracer core). However, Ingo seems use
SystemTAP as an example against the introduction of a united tracer core in the
I though that you would probably like to tell SystemTAP's point of view on that
Thanks for the headup on posting of the LTTng-core patches on LKML. I am
reading through the threads on LTTng right now.
----- Forwarded message from Ingo Molnar <email@example.com> -----
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2006 13:27:18 +0200
To: Mathieu Desnoyers <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Cc: email@example.com, Christoph Hellwig <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
Andrew Morton <email@example.com>, Ingo Molnar <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <email@example.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
Tom Zanussi <email@example.com>, firstname.lastname@example.org,
Michel Dagenais <email@example.com>
From: Ingo Molnar <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/11] LTTng-core (basic tracing infrastructure) 0.5.108
* Mathieu Desnoyers <email@example.com> wrote:
Following an advice Christoph gave me this summer, submitting a
smaller, easier to review patch should make everybody happier. Here is
a stripped down version of LTTng : I removed everything that would
make the code review reluctant (especially kernel instrumentation and
kernel state dump module). I plan to release this "core" version every
few LTTng releases and post it to LKML.
Comments and reviews are very welcome.
i have one very fundamental question: why should we do this
source-intrusive method of adding tracepoints instead of the dynamic,
unintrusive (and thus zero-overhead) KProbes+SystemTap method?
----- End forwarded message -----
OpenPGP public key: http://krystal.dyndns.org:8080/key/compudj.gpg
Key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68