Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751853AbWIRRGa (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Sep 2006 13:06:30 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751854AbWIRRGa (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Sep 2006 13:06:30 -0400 Received: from dvhart.com ([64.146.134.43]:11493 "EHLO dvhart.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751853AbWIRRG3 (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Sep 2006 13:06:29 -0400 Message-ID: <450ED213.9000603@mbligh.org> Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2006 10:06:27 -0700 From: Martin Bligh User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (X11/20051011) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jes Sorensen Cc: karim@opersys.com, Andrew Morton , Ingo Molnar , tglx@linutronix.de, Paul Mundt , Roman Zippel , 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 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> <20060915131317.aaadf568.akpm@osdl.org> <450BCF97.3000901@sgi.com> <450C20C7.30604@opersys.com> <450E5540.4080205@sgi.com> In-Reply-To: <450E5540.4080205@sgi.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1413 Lines: 35 > And it doesn't address the following issues: > > a) The static community providing actual evidence that dynamic tracing > is noticably slower. ... > Everything has performance limitations, you keep running around touting > that static is the only thing thats not a problem. Now show us the > numbers! When comparing two different approaches to a problem, it is unreasonable and disingenuous to try to force the onus on the proponents of one particular approach to do all the benchmarking for both sides. Everybody has to help try to find the correct solution. Furthermore, Mathieu already did provide numbers, if you go back and look. > The problems pointed out with LTT are *conceptual*, but of course you > keep ignoring the facts and refusing to provide real numbers. This is getting very silly, and unnecessarily abusive. Real problems exist on both sides of the fence, which have been discussed ad nauseam. If you don't recall them, then go back and read the thread again. The question is how to strike a comprimise between two different set of problems, which Ingo and Karim actually seemed to be making progress on towards the end of the thread. M. - 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/