This is the mail archive of the systemtap@sourceware.org mailing list for the systemtap project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: [PATCH 0/11] LTTng-core (basic tracing infrastructure) 0.5.108

From: Vara Prasad <prasadav at us dot ibm dot com>
To: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu dot desnoyers at polymtl dot ca>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo at elte dot hu>, Roman Zippel <zippel at linux-m68k dot org>, linux-kernel at vger dot kernel dot org, Christoph Hellwig <hch at infradead dot org>, Andrew Morton <akpm at osdl dot org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo at redhat dot com>, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh at suse dot de>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx at linutronix dot de>, Tom Zanussi <zanussi at us dot ibm dot com>, ltt-dev at shafik dot org, Michel Dagenais <michel dot dagenais at polymtl dot ca>, systemtap <systemtap at sourceware dot org>
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2006 22:47:58 -0700
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/11] LTTng-core (basic tracing infrastructure) 0.5.108
References: <20060914033826.GA2194@Krystal> <20060914112718.GA7065@elte.hu> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0609141537120.6762@scrub.home> <20060914135548.GA24393@elte.hu> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0609141623570.6761@scrub.home> <20060914171320.GB1105@elte.hu> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0609141935080.6761@scrub.home> <20060914181557.GA22469@elte.hu> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0609142038570.6761@scrub.home> <20060914202452.GA9252@elte.hu> <20060915014726.GD23664@Krystal>

Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:

* Ingo Molnar (mingo@elte.hu) wrote:

* Roman Zippel <zippel@linux-m68k.org> wrote:

also, the other disadvantages i listed very much count too. Static tracepoints are fundamentally limited because:

[...]

Right now they are pretty heavy cons as far as LTT goes, so obviously they have a primary impact on the topic at hand (whic is whether to merge LTT or not).
Ingo, why are you arguing about static instrumentation when I don't submit any
static instrumentation in my patch ? You can argue about static VS dynamic
instrumentation all you want, but please don't apply this debate to a dicision
about including or not a core tracing infrastructure that has nothing to do
with the way instrumentation or probes are inserted.
Mathieu

I think Ingo is right in saying what we really need first is a generic mechanism in how to specify static markers in the kernel which can be used to put dynamic probes on demand or use as a real static function calls if one chooses. Once we agree on the marker mechanism dynamic tracing and static tracing can both co-exist happily.

Coming to your rest of the patches i really don't think we need whole lot more than the facilities we already got in the kernel. Frank has successfully demonstrated in OLS how one can use static markers by using only existing facilities in the kernel.

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/

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]