Zoltan, I'm fine with this on trunk, but I still think barring any compelling reason we should leave the branch as is.
-g On Sat, 2008-08-02 at 19:20 +0200, Zoltan Varga wrote: > Hi, > > Looking at dtrace.h, all the current probes seem to be in > non-critical code-paths, so they > are unlikely to have a perf impact. We could make --enable-dtrace=true > the default in HEAD, > so it gets some testing. > > Zoltan > > On Sat, Aug 2, 2008 at 7:16 PM, Geoff Norton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Sat, 2008-08-02 at 18:30 +0200, Andreas Färber wrote: > > > >> Not fully true, there is of course a minimal degradation (~5 nop > >> instructions on Solaris), but it should be hardly noticeable. I have > >> taken care to only call helper functions when the probe is active. > >> > >> Was the answer on IRC in any way official? I could think of three > >> possible reasons: > >> > >> a) Worries about performance degradation. > > > > Yes > > > >> b) No one updated the build system. > > > > True but minor > > > >> c) The build machine isn't DTrace-capable. > > > > d) We havn't tested it fully in our QA process, nor has it been > > available long enough for us to feel comfortable turning it on at this > > stage. We also would need to invesgate how to do it in our universal > > binaries, etc. Its a lot of testing and it unfortunately will not make > > 2.0 unless there is a compelling argument against this and support from > > the runtime team and from the QA team. > > > > -g > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Mono-devel-list mailing list > > Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com > > http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list > > _______________________________________________ Mono-devel-list mailing list Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list