Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2009 01:02:34 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com>
Cc: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@redhat.com>,
       lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
       systemtap <systemtap@sources.redhat.com>,
       DLE <dle-develop@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -tip 2/3] Add coredump tracepoint
Message-ID: <20091114000234.GA24738@elte.hu>
References: <20091113225226.15079.90813.stgit@harusame>
 <20091113225233.15079.41600.stgit@harusame>
 <20091113233912.192A3100E@magilla.sf.frob.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20091113233912.192A3100E@magilla.sf.frob.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-08-17)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1119
Lines: 30


* Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com> wrote:

> I can't really see what this has to do with "sched" to warrant that 
> name. But, whatever.

That's a misnomer indeed. I'd suggest to introduce a separate 'signal' 
subsystem category.

> Note that you put the tracepoint where it won't get called in the 
> various cases where no dump is really being made because of 
> RLIMIT_CORE or file failures.  I suspect you would like to get those 
> reported.  (Perhaps especially so, since there won't be any file 
> around to notice later.)

Yeah, good point.

> Also, it seems nice to give the tracepoint the chance to look at the 
> actual open file in case a fancy one wants to do that.

Oh, so SystemTap is the motivator of these tracepoints? Do you know 
about exact usecases where these tracepoints would be utilized? Would be 
interesting (and relevant) to list them.

	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/