Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751543AbWIOTn5 (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Sep 2006 15:43:57 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751585AbWIOTn5 (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Sep 2006 15:43:57 -0400 Received: from scrub.xs4all.nl ([194.109.195.176]:26791 "EHLO scrub.xs4all.nl") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751532AbWIOTn4 (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Sep 2006 15:43:56 -0400 Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2006 21:43:20 +0200 (CEST) From: Roman Zippel X-X-Sender: roman@scrub.home To: Ingo Molnar cc: Andrew Morton , tglx@linutronix.de, karim@opersys.com, Paul Mundt , Jes Sorensen , Mathieu Desnoyers , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig , Ingo Molnar , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Tom Zanussi , ltt-dev@shafik.org, Michel Dagenais Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/11] LTTng-core (basic tracing infrastructure) 0.5.108 In-Reply-To: <20060915181907.GB17581@elte.hu> Message-ID: References: <20060915132052.GA7843@localhost.usen.ad.jp> <20060915135709.GB8723@localhost.usen.ad.jp> <450AB5F9.8040501@opersys.com> <450AB506.30802@sgi.com> <450AB957.2050206@opersys.com> <20060915142836.GA9288@localhost.usen.ad.jp> <450ABE08.2060107@opersys.com> <1158332447.5724.423.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060915111644.c857b2cf.akpm@osdl.org> <20060915181907.GB17581@elte.hu> 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: 1834 Lines: 46 Hi, On Fri, 15 Sep 2006, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > What Karim is sharing with us here (yet again) is the real in-field > > experience of real users (ie: not kernel developers). > > well, Jes has that experience and Thomas too. > > > I mean, on one hand we have people explaining what they think a > > tracing facility should and shouldn't do, and on the other hand we > > have a guy who has been maintaining and shipping exactly that thing to > > (paying!) customers for many years. > > so does Thomas and Jes. So what's the point? That only Karim's experience is being in question here? > i judge LTT by its current code quality, not by its proponents shouting > volume - and that quality is still quite poor at the moment. (and then > there are the conceptual problems too, outlined numerous times) I have > quoted specific example(s) for that in this thread. Furthermore, LTT > does this: > > 246 files changed, 26207 insertions(+), 71 deletions(-) > > and this gives me the shivers, for all the reasons i outlined. Well, I'm first to admit that LTT needs improvement, but that has never been the point. We need to get to some kind of agreement what level of tracing Linux should support in general, preferably something that is easy to integrate and usable by everyone. Especially the latter means that there is not one true solution, so we need to figure out what kind of common infrastructure can be implemented, from which all of them can benefit. At this point you've been rather uncompromising contrary to every single argument from either side. 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/