Date: Wed, 2 May 2007 09:47:07 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
Cc: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca>,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rusty@rustcorp.com.au, wfg@ustc.edu
Subject: Re: 2.6.22 -mm merge plans
Message-Id: <20070502094707.4197ab7a.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
In-Reply-To: <20070502104413.GC4392@one.firstfloor.org>
References: <20070430162007.ad46e153.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
	<p733b2gzqkg.fsf@bingen.suse.de>
	<20070501220803.GA27698@Krystal>
	<20070502104413.GC4392@one.firstfloor.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1167
Lines: 24

On Wed, 2 May 2007 12:44:13 +0200 Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> wrote:

> > It is currently used as an instrumentation infrastructure for the LTTng
> > tracer at IBM, Google, Autodesk, Sony, MontaVista and deployed in
> > WindRiver products.  The SystemTAP project also plan to use this type of
> > infrastructure to trace sites hard to instrument. The Linux Kernel
> > Markers has the support of Frank C. Eigler, author of their current
> > marker alternative (which he wishes to drop in order to adopt the
> > markers infrastructure as soon as it hits mainline).
> 
> All of the above don't use mainline kernels.

That's because they have to add a markers patch!

> That doesn't constitute using it.

Andi, there was a huge amount of discussion about all this in September last
year (subjects: *markers* and *LTTng*). The outcome of all that was, I
believe, that the kernel should have a static marker infrastructure.
-
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/