lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Sep]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH tracing/kprobes 0/7] tracing/kprobes: kprobe-based event tracer update and perf support
From
Date
On Fri, 2009-09-11 at 15:06 -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 03:03:35PM -0400, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
> > Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com> writes:
> >
> > > [...] I'm really looking forward seeing this C expression-like
> > > kprobe creation tool. It seems powerful enough to replace printk +
> > > kernel rebuild. No need anymore to write some printk to debug,
> > > worrying, [...]
> >
> > To a large extent, systemtap had delivered this already some years
> > ago, including the cushy ponies dancing in the sunlight. While such
> > low-level machinery is fine, some of our experience indicates that it
> > is dramatically easier to use if high-level, symbolic, debugging data
> > is used to compute probe locations and variable names/types/locations.
>
> No, systemtap has been for years failing to delivers this in a way that
> it could be usefully integrated into the kernel.

You are saying "No" to a claim Frank didn't even make.

> Masami's patches are
> exactly the kind of low-level functionality we absolutely need in the
> kernel tree so that we can built more useful higherlevel tools ontop
> of this.

And nobody is denying that either. I think everybody agrees that Masami
is doing some really wonderful work and improving the kprobes
foundations in a way that any higher level tracing tool will benefit
from it.

Cheers,

Mark



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-09-11 21:55    [W:0.136 / U:0.140 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site