Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751430AbWIONf3 (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Sep 2006 09:35:29 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751433AbWIONf3 (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Sep 2006 09:35:29 -0400 Received: from scrub.xs4all.nl ([194.109.195.176]:6821 "EHLO scrub.xs4all.nl") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751430AbWIONf2 (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Sep 2006 09:35:28 -0400 Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2006 15:34:52 +0200 (CEST) From: Roman Zippel X-X-Sender: roman@scrub.home To: Alan Cox cc: Tim Bird , Ingo Molnar , Mathieu Desnoyers , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig , Andrew Morton , Ingo Molnar , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Thomas Gleixner , Tom Zanussi , ltt-dev@shafik.org, Michel Dagenais Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/11] LTTng-core (basic tracing infrastructure) 0.5.108 In-Reply-To: <1158327696.29932.29.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: References: <20060914033826.GA2194@Krystal> <20060914112718.GA7065@elte.hu> <20060914135548.GA24393@elte.hu> <20060914171320.GB1105@elte.hu> <20060914181557.GA22469@elte.hu> <4509B03A.3070504@am.sony.com> <1158320406.29932.16.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1158323938.29932.23.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1158327696.29932.29.camel@localhost.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1493 Lines: 35 Hi, On Fri, 15 Sep 2006, Alan Cox wrote: > Ar Gwe, 2006-09-15 am 14:39 +0200, ysgrifennodd Roman Zippel: > > Both points have very strong consequences regarding complexity. Why do you > > want to deny me the choice to use something simple, especially since both > > solutions are not mutually exclusive and can even complement each other? > > I don't want to deny you the choice, I just don't want to see > unneccessary garbage in the base kernel. What you put in your own toilet > is a private matter. What you leave out in a public place is different. Now we've already sunken to the toilet level... :-( > > What's the point in forcing everyone to use a single solution? > > Maintainability ? common good over individual weirdnesses ? Ability for > people to concentrate on getting one good set of interfaces not twelve > bad ones ? Consistency for user space ? Alan, you're making things up without any proof. Listening to this diatribe against static tracepoints, one could get idea they would be something alien, which would polute the source. Well, everything can be abused, but good tracepoints are like good documentation, nobody wants to write and maintain it, but in the end others benefit from it if it exists. bye, Roman - 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/