* Frank Rowand wrote:
> On 12/20/11 03:08, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > (Cc:-ing Arnaldo on this as well.)
> >
> > * Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> >
>
> < snip >
>
> > I think your concentration on ABIs is missing a very fundamental
> > property of instrumentation:
> >
> > the life-time and
Vmware using it is more a reason to avoid it than using it.. :)
And most certainly not a reason to export internal kernel details.
___
lttng-dev mailing list
lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org
http://lists.lttng.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lttng-dev
* Ingo Molnar wrote:
> "CTF" was mainly written by yourself, right?
>
> If there's any tool worth caring about that wants to deal in CTF
> then it can be converted just fine. I don't think it matters
> nearly as much as you seem to imply, see my reply further below.
Hi Ingo,
I thought it might
On 12/20/11 03:08, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> (Cc:-ing Arnaldo on this as well.)
>
> * Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
>
< snip >
> I think your concentration on ABIs is missing a very fundamental
> property of instrumentation:
>
> the life-time and persistence of instrumentation data is
> typica
(Cc:-ing Arnaldo on this as well.)
* Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> > Mathieu, any update on this? I don't want the LTTNG goodies
> > to drop on the floor - we just have to integrate them
> > properly.
> >
> > If you 100% disagree with how specific things are done
> > upstream right now then do
* Ingo Molnar (mi...@elte.hu) wrote:
>
> * Greg KH wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Dec 08, 2011 at 06:23:54AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
[...]
> > > There's a highly constructive, open attitude towards LTTNG and
> > > has been for years:
> > >
> > > " Mathieu, please split it up and integrate/unify it wi
* Greg KH wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 08, 2011 at 06:23:54AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > * Greg KH wrote:
> >
> > > > Same goes for a whole lot of other crap that distros are
> > > > carrying. Would we want to merge a different CPU scheduler
> > > > or the 4g:4g patch or a completely new net
On Thu, Dec 08, 2011 at 06:23:54AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Greg KH wrote:
>
> > > Same goes for a whole lot of other crap that distros are
> > > carrying. Would we want to merge a different CPU scheduler
> > > or the 4g:4g patch or a completely new networking stack into
> > > drivers/
* Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> Hi Ingo,
>
> * Ingo Molnar (mi...@elte.hu) wrote:
> [...]
> > Mathieu, please work with the tracing folks who DO care about
> > this stuff. It's not like there's a lack of interest in this
> > area, nor is there a lack of willingness to take patches. What
> > the
* Greg KH wrote:
> > Same goes for a whole lot of other crap that distros are
> > carrying. Would we want to merge a different CPU scheduler
> > or the 4g:4g patch or a completely new networking stack into
> > drivers/staging/? I don't think so.
>
> Distros have new CPU schedulers and are st
Hi Ingo,
* Ingo Molnar (mi...@elte.hu) wrote:
[...]
> Mathieu, please work with the tracing folks who DO care about
> this stuff. It's not like there's a lack of interest in this
> area, nor is there a lack of willingness to take patches. What
> there is a lack of is your willingness to actuall
On Mon, Dec 05, 2011 at 03:17:49PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Greg KH wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 12:07:10AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2011-12-01 at 14:14 -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> > > > greg k-h
> > >
> > > Greg, why are you merging this crap anyway? Aren't there e
* Greg KH wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 12:07:10AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Thu, 2011-12-01 at 14:14 -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> > > greg k-h
> >
> > Greg, why are you merging this crap anyway? Aren't there enough tracer
> > thingies around already?
>
> I don't know, is there?
>
> T
* Peter Zijlstra (pet...@infradead.org) wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-12-01 at 17:36 -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> > So what you are saying is that it is fine to export task_prio to
> > _userspace_, thus making it part of the ABI, but it's not OK to export
> > it to GPL modules ?
>
> that's a SCHED_D
* Greg KH (g...@kroah.com) wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 12:06:37AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Thu, 2011-12-01 at 17:15 -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> > >
> > > If you don't want to trace sched_switch, but just conveniently prepend
> > > this information to all your events
> >
> >
On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 12:06:37AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-12-01 at 17:15 -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> >
> > If you don't want to trace sched_switch, but just conveniently prepend
> > this information to all your events
>
> Oh so you want to debug a scheduler issue but d
On Fri, Dec 02, 2011 at 12:07:10AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-12-01 at 14:14 -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> > greg k-h
>
> Greg, why are you merging this crap anyway? Aren't there enough tracer
> thingies around already?
I don't know, is there?
There's some reason the distros, and user
On Thu, 2011-12-01 at 14:14 -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> greg k-h
Greg, why are you merging this crap anyway? Aren't there enough tracer
thingies around already?
___
lttng-dev mailing list
lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org
http://lists.lttng.org/cgi-bin/mailman/list
On Thu, 2011-12-01 at 17:15 -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
>
> If you don't want to trace sched_switch, but just conveniently prepend
> this information to all your events
Oh so you want to debug a scheduler issue but don't want to use the
scheduler tracepoint, I guess that makes perfect sense
On Thu, 2011-12-01 at 17:36 -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> So what you are saying is that it is fine to export task_prio to
> _userspace_, thus making it part of the ABI, but it's not OK to export
> it to GPL modules ?
that's a SCHED_DEBUG proc file.
__
* Mathieu Desnoyers (mathieu.desnoy...@efficios.com) wrote:
> * Peter Zijlstra (pet...@infradead.org) wrote:
> > On Thu, 2011-12-01 at 17:04 -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> > > * Peter Zijlstra (pet...@infradead.org) wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 2011-12-01 at 16:41 -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> > >
* Greg KH (g...@kroah.com) wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 01, 2011 at 10:56:08PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Thu, 2011-12-01 at 16:41 -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> > > LTTng needs this symbol to prepend the current task dynamic priority
> > > value to events (optional context information).
> >
>
On Thu, Dec 01, 2011 at 10:56:08PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-12-01 at 16:41 -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> > LTTng needs this symbol to prepend the current task dynamic priority
> > value to events (optional context information).
>
> I absolutely detest exporting such stuff. I
* Peter Zijlstra (pet...@infradead.org) wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-12-01 at 17:04 -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> > * Peter Zijlstra (pet...@infradead.org) wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2011-12-01 at 16:41 -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> > > > LTTng needs this symbol to prepend the current task dynamic prior
On Thu, 2011-12-01 at 17:04 -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> * Peter Zijlstra (pet...@infradead.org) wrote:
> > On Thu, 2011-12-01 at 16:41 -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> > > LTTng needs this symbol to prepend the current task dynamic priority
> > > value to events (optional context information
* Peter Zijlstra (pet...@infradead.org) wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-12-01 at 16:41 -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> > LTTng needs this symbol to prepend the current task dynamic priority
> > value to events (optional context information).
>
> I absolutely detest exporting such stuff. It propagates the
On Thu, 2011-12-01 at 16:41 -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> LTTng needs this symbol to prepend the current task dynamic priority
> value to events (optional context information).
I absolutely detest exporting such stuff. It propagates the idea that
task prio actually means something. Also, modul
LTTng needs this symbol to prepend the current task dynamic priority
value to events (optional context information).
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Desnoyers
CC: Ingo Molnar
CC: Peter Zijlstra
CC: linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org
CC: Greg KH
---
kernel/sched.c |1 +
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+),
28 matches
Mail list logo
