[lkml]   [2009]   [Mar]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 3/3] utrace-based ftrace "process" engine, v2

    * Diego Calleja <> wrote:

    > On Sábado 21 Marzo 2009 16:45:01 Ingo Molnar escribió:
    > > The main issue i see is that no kernel developer i work with on a
    > > daily basis uses SystemTap - and i work with a lot of people. Yes, i
    > > could perhaps name two or three people from lkml using it, but its
    > > average penetration amongst kernel folks is essentially zero.
    > What about userspace developers? People always talks of systemtap
    > as a kernel thing, but my (humble) impression is that kernel
    > hackers don't seem to need it that much (maybe for the same
    > reasons they didn't a kernel debugger ;), but userspace developers
    > do. There're many userspace projects that offer optional compile
    > options to enable dtrace probes (some people like apple even ship
    > executables of python, perl and ruby with probes by default).
    > There're several firefox hackers that switched to dtrace-capable
    > systems just because the dtrace-javascript probes enabled them to
    > debug javashit code in ways they weren't able in linux or windows.
    > In my humble opinion a better development environment for linux
    > userspace programmers is way more important than whether kernel
    > hackers like systemtap or not. So maybe the discussion should be
    > less about "does it help kernel hackers?" and more about "does it
    > help userspace hackers?". My 2¢...

    Well, i consider kernel development to be just another form of
    software development, so i dont subscribe to the view that it is
    intrinsically different. (Yes, the kernel has many unique aspects -
    but most software projects have unique aspects.)

    In terms of development methodology and tools, in fact i claim that
    the kernel workflow and style of development can be applied to most
    user-space software projects with great success.

    So ... if a new development tool is apparently not (yet?) suited to
    a very large and sanely developed software project like the Linux
    kernel, i dont take that as an encouraging sign.

    Also, there's practical aspects: the kernel is what we know best so
    if we can make it work well for the kernel, hopes are that other
    large projects can use it too. If we _only_ make the tool good for
    non-kernel purposes, who else will fix it for the kernel? The
    icentive to fix it for the kernel will be significantly lower.

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2009-03-22 13:21    [W:0.024 / U:2.092 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site