Re: [PATCH 0/11] LTTng-core (basic tracing infrastructure) 0.5.108


* Karim Yaghmour <karim@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

the tracebuffer management portion of LTT is better than the hacks
in SystemTap, and that LTT's visualization tools are better (for
example they do exist :-) - so clearly there's synergy possible.

Great, because I believe all those involved would like to see this
happen. I personally am convinced that none of those involved want to
continue wasting their time in parallel.

a reasonable compromise for me would be what i suggested a few mails
ago:

nor do i reject all of LTT: as i said before i like the tools, and i
think its collection of trace events should be turned into systemtap
markups and scripts. Furthermore, it's ringbuffer implementation looks
better. So as far as the user is concerned, LTT could (and should) live
on with full capabilities, but with this crutial difference in how it
interfaces to the kernel source code.

i.e. could you try to just give SystemTap a chance and attempt to
integrate a portion of LTT with it ... that shares more of the
infrastructure and we'd obviously only need "one" markup variant, and
would have full markup (removal-) flexibility. I'll try to help djprobes
as much as possible. Hm?

Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Relevant Pages

  • Re: tracepoint maintainance models
    ... SystemTap script, that would come quite a bit closer to being acceptable ... for upstream acceptance in my opinion. ... is not in the markup, ... if the signal *and* endorsement is that LTT and SystemTap ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • Re: [PATCH 0/11] LTTng-core (basic tracing infrastructure) 0.5.108
    ... So as far as the user is concerned, LTT could live ... The interface to the kernel source code can be worked on. ... would have full markup flexibility. ... I have absolutely nothing against SystemTap. ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • Re: tracepoint maintainance models
    ... and isn't a pure static tracing system. ... I don't understand why LTT and SystemTap can't just ... SystemTap script, that would come quite a bit closer to being acceptable ... why doesnt LTT integrate SystemTap yet? ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • Re: [PATCH 0/11] LTTng-core (basic tracing infrastructure) 0.5.108
    ... infrastructure is not actually what the LTT patches are doing. ... each trace entry includes: ... has static tracepoints too, in addition to the 20,000-40,000 mcount ... all this in SystemTap;-) If we add any static points to the kernel then ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • LTTng and SystemTAP (Everyone who is scared to read this huge thread, skip to here)
    ... facility that allows the painless moving of a static LTT markup to a ... why doesnt LTT integrate SystemTap yet? ... I thought about moving this tracing code ...
    (Linux-Kernel)