lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Sep]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/11] LTTng-core (basic tracing infrastructure) 0.5.108
    From
    Date
    On Fri, 2006-09-15 at 10:51 -0400, Karim Yaghmour wrote:
    > And what I did is "b". I wasn't going to defend anybody else's
    > choice of tracepoints. Those who were using ltt for its designated
    > purpose -- allowing normal users and developers to get an accurate
    > view of the behavior of their system -- were very happy with it.
    >
    > You want to know who was unhappy with using it: kernel developers.
    > It just wasn't geared for them. Which goes back to my earlier
    > arguments ...

    What do you want to prove with this rant ? Simply the fact that your
    view of tracing is not matching the view of others. Nothing else.

    You just made it clear, that your solution was and still is targeted on
    one single user group.

    Nobody is opposing instrumentation per se, we just need to figure out a
    good solution suitable for endusers, kernel developers, debug
    fetishists ... without splattering ten different tracers all across the
    kernel source.

    The way to a solid kernel instrumentation is definitely not by pushing a
    single purpose solution in, which we have to _maintain_ for a long time
    without being convinced that it is the _best_ technical solution we can
    have right now.

    tglx


    -
    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/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2006-09-15 17:03    [W:3.866 / U:0.036 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site