Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754621AbZI3O6h (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Sep 2009 10:58:37 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754571AbZI3O6h (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Sep 2009 10:58:37 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:36742 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754557AbZI3O6g (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Sep 2009 10:58:36 -0400 Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2009 11:57:58 -0300 From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Masami Hiramatsu , Frederic Weisbecker , Steven Rostedt , lkml , Thomas Gleixner , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Mike Galbraith , Paul Mackerras , Peter Zijlstra , Christoph Hellwig , Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli , Jim Keniston , "Frank Ch. Eigler" , systemtap , DLE Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH tracing/kprobes 0/5] tracing/kprobes, perf: perf kprobe support Message-ID: <20090930145758.GL3361@ghostprotocols.net> References: <20090925191424.12939.91503.stgit@omoto> <4AC2AF01.9090202@redhat.com> <20090930120418.GB7618@elte.hu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090930120418.GB7618@elte.hu> X-Url: http://oops.ghostprotocols.net:81/blog User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.19 (2009-01-05) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1452 Lines: 40 Em Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 02:04:18PM +0200, Ingo Molnar escreveu: > > * Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > > > Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> These patches introduce perf kprobe command and update kprobe-tracer. > >> perf kprobe command allows you to add new probe points by C line number > >> and local variable names. > > > > Last week, Arnaldo and I talked about this command, and he suggested > > that the command would be better 'perf probe', because it would be > > able to cover both of kernel space (by kprobes) and user space (by > > uprobes). > > Agreed. > > > Basically, I agree with his idea. But I think we may need to consider > > more flexible syntax for that purpose before we support uprobes. In > > this area, SystemTap has done big advance, we can see how many > > varieties of syntax it has by 'man stapprobes'. > > > > And also, it's hard to decide it without real uprobe-tracer (and > > uprobes too!) implementation on ftrace. So, I think it is better to > > continue using 'perf kprobe' in this time. > > > > But it's worth to add to todo list. :) > > I'd still name it 'perf probe', even if initially it supports kprobes. Agreed. - Arnaldo -- 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/