Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 15 Sep 2006 16:13:26 +0200 | From | Jes Sorensen <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/11] LTTng-core (basic tracing infrastructure) 0.5.108 |
| |
Karim Yaghmour wrote: > Paul Mundt wrote: >> subjective, LTT proved that this was a problem regarding general >> code-level intrusiveness when the number of tracepoints in relatively >> close locality started piling up based on what people considered >> arbitrarily useful, and LTTng doesn't appear to do anything to address >> this. > > "LTT proved that ..." what are you talking about? Have you noticed > the posting earlier regarding the fact that the ltt tracepoints did > not change over a 5 year span? **five** years ... Where do you get > this claim that ltt trace points "started piling up"? Have a look > at figure 2 of this article and let me know exactly which of those > tracepoints are actually a problem to you:
Because other people have tried to use LTT for additional projects, but said projects haven't been integrated into LTT. In other words, just because *you* haven't added those, doesn't mean someone else won't try and do it later, if LTT was integrated.
Nice try!
Jes - 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/
| |