[lkml]   [2006]   [Sep]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [patch] kprobes: optimize branch placement

    * Andrew Morton <> wrote:

    > On Sat, 16 Sep 2006 17:44:25 -0400
    > Karim Yaghmour <> wrote:
    > > So now you're resorting to your uber-talents as a kernel guru to
    > > bury the other side?
    > It's hardly rocket science - it appears that nobody has ever bothered.

    yeah. Performance of kprobes was never really a big issue, kprobes were
    always more than fast enough in my opinion. Would be nice if Mathieu
    could try to re-run his kprobes test with these patches applied. I still
    havent given up on the hope of convincing the LTT folks that they
    shouldnt let their sizable codebase drop on the floor but should attempt
    to integrate it with kprobes/systemtap. There's nothing wrong with what
    LTT gives to users, it's just the tracing engine itself (the static hook
    based component) that i have a conceptual problem with - not with the
    rest. Most of the know-how of tracers is in the identification of the
    information that should be extracted, its linkup and delivery to
    user-space tools.

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2006-09-17 01:35    [W:0.020 / U:23.408 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site