Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Fri, 09 Jul 2004 11:00:33 -0400 | | From | Karim Yaghmour <> | | Subject | About the usefulness of kernel tracing |
| |
As I noted when discussing this with Andrew, we've been trying to get LTT into the kernel for the past five (5) years. During that time we've repeatedly encountered the same type of arguments for not including it, and have provided proof as to why those arguments are not substantiated. Lately I've at least got Andrew to admit that there were no maintenance issues with the LTT trace statements (given that they've literally remained unchanged ever since LTT was introduced.) In an effort to address the issues regarding the usefulness of such a tool, I direct those interested to this article on DTrace, a trace utility for Solaris: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/07/08/dtrace_user_take/
<rant> With LTT and DProbes, we've basically got almost everything this tool claims to provide, save that we would be even further down the road if we did not need to spend so much time updating patches ... </rant>
Karim -- Author, Speaker, Developer, Consultant Pushing Embedded and Real-Time Linux Systems Beyond the Limits http://www.opersys.com || karim@opersys.com || 1-866-677-4546 - 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/
|  |