Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 14 Jan 2005 16:26:52 -0800 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: 2.6.11-rc1-mm1 |
| |
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote: > > ... > I'm impressed of your sudden time constraints awareness. Allowing 8192 > bytes of user event size, string printing with varags and XML tracing > is not biting you ?
? I see no XML in there.
akpm:/usr/src/25> grep -i xml patches/ltt* patches/relayfs* patches/ltt-core-headers.patch:+#define LTT_CUSTOM_EV_FORMAT_TYPE_XML 3 akpm:/usr/src/25>
> > Haha. If you have eventstamps and timestamps (even the jiffie + event > based ones) nothing is hard to interpret. I guess the ethereal guys are > rolling on the floor and laughing. > > The kernel is not the place to fix your postprocessing problems. Sure > you have to do more complicated stuff, but you move the burden from > kernel to a place where it does not hurt.
I thought Karim said that this was a form of data compression.
> > Yes, the "you would anyway have to go down the same path we have" > argument really scares me away from doing so. > > I don't buy this kind of arguments.
I do. When someone has been working on a real-world project for several years we *need* to understand all the problems which that person encountered before we can competently review the implementation. Surely you've been there before: you throw out all the old stuff, write a new one and once you've addressed all the warts and corner cases and weird-but-valid requirements it ends up with the same complexity as the original. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |