Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2008 15:07:54 +0200
From: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
To: "Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@redhat.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
       James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>,
       linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, systemtap@sourceware.org,
       jbeulich@novell.com
Subject: Re: [RFC] systemtap: begin the process of using proper kernel APIs 	(part1: use kprobe symbol_name/offset instead of address)
Message-ID: <20080718130754.GB32051@basil.nowhere.org>
References: <1216146802.3312.95.camel@localhost.localdomain> <87ej5rsgk4.fsf@basil.nowhere.org> <1216373009.5232.130.camel@twins> <y0m7ibjjqg4.fsf@ton.toronto.redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <y0m7ibjjqg4.fsf@ton.toronto.redhat.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 815
Lines: 19

> For example, we're about to do unwinding/stack-traces of userspace
> programs.  To what extent do you think the kernel unwinder (should one
> reappear in git) would welcome patches that provide zero benefit to
> the kernel, but only enable a peculiar (nonintrusive) sort of
> unwinding we would need for complex userspace stacks?

In theory if the tables are right you don't need any special
for the kernel dwarf2 unwinder.  If the tables are not right
fix them.

I believe oprofile did this already in some cases (generating
user back traces from the kernel) 

-Andi
--
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/