Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 18 Jan 2012 10:39:44 +0100 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [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
| |