[PATCH 5/5] tracing/ftrace: Introduce the big kernel lock tracer
Frank Ch. Eigler
fche@redhat.com
Fri Oct 24 15:03:00 GMT 2008
Hi -
On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 10:47:36AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> [...]
> > > I would rather prefer to use an API that provides functions/objects
> > > for most common scripting languages.
> >
> > That is an interesting idea. One possible problem is that the final
> > complete script "program" needs to be translated to something that can
> > run quickly and safely inside the kernel. Full python or perl runtime
> > + libraries would have been almost certainly unbearable.
>
> Why can't the userspace application convert the script to something
> easy that the kernel can handle?
That's what we do with the systemtap script, where kernel "handling"
consists of "running the machine code".
> But have the user application interface be very simple, and perhaps
> even use perl or python.
perl and python are pretty big procedural languages, and are not
easily compiled down to compact & quickly executed machine code. (I
take it no one is suggesting including a perl or python VM in the
kernel.) Plus, debugger-flavoured event-handling programming style
would not look nearly as compact in perl/python as in systemtap, which
is small and domain-specific.
- FChE
More information about the Systemtap
mailing list