On Sun, Aug 05, 2018 at 12:22:04AM +0200, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote: > On Thu, Aug 02, 2018 at 09:26:00PM -0400, Thor Lancelot Simon wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 02, 2018 at 01:46:35PM +0200, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote: > > > On Wed, Aug 01, 2018 at 11:54:10PM -0400, Thor Lancelot Simon wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 08:28:19AM +0000, Christos Zoulas wrote: > > > > > In article <2c408f23-6eae-da00-dfb2-ebc7b66e6...@gmx.com>, > > > > > Kamil Rytarowski <n...@gmx.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >I'm for removal of gprof and deduplication of .a files in the base. > > > > > > > > > > > >While there, can we get rid of moncontrol(3), profil(2) and all the > > > > > >corresponding code? > > > > > > > > > > I constantly see proposals to remove things from base without > > > > > replacing > > > > > the functionality first. Yes, the current state is poor but the > > > > > "hand hurts, cut hand" approach is worse. > > > > > > > > Here it'd also be "cut arm", I think, since the kernel profiling that > > > > relies on the same tools does still work, and, though limited, can do > > > > some things out of the box that take nontrivial effort with the DTrace > > > > FBT provider, the nearest alternative. > > > > > > The kernel is quite different beast as it is self-contained. > > > > But it uses the same userspace tools for analysis. > > I haven't been talking about gprof, I could care less about that > program itself. That said, I would expect copying the interceptor
Oh, FFS. Please read the *very first line quoted above*. I don't care whether you rip out -pg support for userland so long as you say there's a better alternative - I trust you. But, please. don't touch tools shared with the kernel profiling unless and until there is a fully equivalent and documented alternative in our source tree. -- Thor Lancelot Simon t...@panix.com "Whether or not there's hope for change is not the question. If you want to be a free person, you don't stand up for human rights because it will work, but because it is right." --Andrei Sakharov
