On 19 October 2015 at 14:17, Markus Armbruster <arm...@redhat.com> wrote: > Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> writes: >> In a lot of cases, especially with the TCG logging, not enabling >> voluminous tracing is really important because if you turn it all >> on then the system is way too slow (and can behave differently >> as a result), and generates gigabytes of trace output. (-d exec >> and -d cpu will do this, for instance.) > > This is at least as much an argument for use of tracing as against it. > Tracing is a lot more flexible than log.h, and with the right backend, > it's much more efficient, too. > > If the appropriate trace patterns turn out to be too hard to remember, > we can provide canned trace patterns with names that are easy to > remember. > > -d could become sugar for a suitable trace patterns.
I don't object to the use of tracing under the hood, as long as the user-facing experience remains as good as what we have for -d at the moment (in terms of it being always present, working the same for everybody, easily discoverable and simple to use). thanks -- PMM
