lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Oct]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Relicensing tracepoints and markers to Dual LGPL v2.1/GPL v2,headers to Dual BSD/GPL

* Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org> wrote:

> On Mon, 26 Oct 2009 09:17:49 -0400
> Pierre-Marc Fournier <pierre-marc.fournier@polymtl.ca> wrote:
>
> > Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > >
> > > But i also disagree with it on a technical level: code duplication
> > > is _bad_. Why does the code have to be duplicated in user-space
> > > like that? I'd like Linux tracing code to be in the kernel repo.
> > > Why isnt this done properly, as part of the kernel project - to
> > > make sure it all stays in sync?
> > >
> >
> > If you mean that this code should solely be used inside the kernel,
> > then what you propose technically does not work. There is a very high
> > cost to accessing kernel code from userspace.
>
> yeah 100 cycles is insanely high, that's at least the equivalent of...
> say one cache miss.

That too - plus 'being in the kernel repo' does not mean it has to run
in kernel mode. It could be a vdso feature or a library in tools/. I'm
quite sure it's a mistake to ad-hoc export the current tracepoint.c code
to user-space without having it all under the same maintenance envelope.

Ingo


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-10-26 21:23    [W:0.062 / U:0.816 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site