Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S964835AbWIPXIg (ORCPT ); Sat, 16 Sep 2006 19:08:36 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S964840AbWIPXIg (ORCPT ); Sat, 16 Sep 2006 19:08:36 -0400 Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:23246 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964835AbWIPXIf (ORCPT ); Sat, 16 Sep 2006 19:08:35 -0400 Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 01:00:31 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Roman Zippel Cc: Thomas Gleixner , karim@opersys.com, Andrew Morton , 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 Message-ID: <20060916230031.GB20180@elte.hu> References: <1158351780.5724.507.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20060915204812.GA6909@elte.hu> <20060915215112.GB12789@elte.hu> <20060915231419.GA24731@elte.hu> <20060916082214.GD6317@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-ELTE-SpamScore: -2.9 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-2.9 required=5.9 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_50 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.0.3 -3.3 ALL_TRUSTED Did not pass through any untrusted hosts 0.5 BAYES_50 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 40 to 60% [score: 0.4719] -0.1 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1049 Lines: 25 * Roman Zippel wrote: > Since my options are right now limited to a static tracer in first > place, [...] Lets see the equation of the current situation. On one side you want static tracing but you dont want to implement kprobes on m68k - although you probably could. On the other side there is the main kernel, which, if it ever accepted static tracepoints, could probably never get rid of them. so, you request the main kernel to accept hundreds of static tracepoints that would probably never go away, just because you are reluctant at the moment to implement kprobes? And that only to bridge a temporary period of time when m68k has no kprobes support yet? Combined with the fact that m68k was just fine without tracing for 13 years? Did i get that right? Ingo - 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/