lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Jan]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [GIT PULL] tracing: make signal tracepoints more useful

* Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:

> On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 7:10 AM, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > But do we really need to keep the old tracepoint? IOW, what
> > if we simply rename it and add more info?
>
> Quite frankly, unless somebody can point to something that
> breaks, I'd rather just change the existing one.
>
> Nobody outside of a few special cases uses tracepoints.
> *nobody*. The only apps I have ever seen that matters to
> anybody ends up being latencytop and powertop. If those two
> have been tested and don't care, I don't think we should care.

Correct. (There's also sysprof and perf - both should be fine.)

As i said in my very first mail:

> [...] Which apps/tools rely on the old tracepoint? If it's
> exactly zero apps then we might be able to change it, but this
> needs to be investigated.

I resisted Steve's "this ABI change is safe by design" notion
which is somewhat of a disease. It is probably fine but not by
definition.

Thanks,

Ingo


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-01-18 10:43    [W:0.175 / U:0.036 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site