From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:59477)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <chouteau@adacore.com>) id 1QEhPh-000100-L0
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 08:30:46 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <chouteau@adacore.com>) id 1QEhPg-000423-WC
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 08:30:45 -0400
Received: from mel.act-europe.fr ([194.98.77.210]:58768)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <chouteau@adacore.com>) id 1QEhPg-00040m-Ro
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 26 Apr 2011 08:30:44 -0400
Message-ID: <4DB6BADF.5030806@adacore.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 14:30:23 +0200
From: Fabien Chouteau <chouteau@adacore.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20110406183341.22854.93929.stgit@ginnungagap.bsc.es>	<20110406183503.22854.39534.stgit@ginnungagap.bsc.es>	<BANLkTikTv7-sFKfqU36iSkpwL_ZAq=p_nQ@mail.gmail.com>	<4DB3C204.1030400@redhat.com>	<BANLkTimR+U4uSnYXguw=nf2mv_osiw6tnA@mail.gmail.com>
	<87hb9mtylx.fsf@fulla.xlab.taz> <4DB5B916.7000400@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <4DB5B916.7000400@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 10/11] trace-state: [stderr] add support
 for dynamically enabling/disabling events
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@gmail.com>, =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Llu=EDs?= <xscript@gmx.net>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On 04/25/2011 08:10 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 04/25/2011 12:27 PM, Llu=EDs wrote:
>> But in any case, I'm still not sure if stderr should have programatic
>> tracing state controls.
>=20
> Yes, please, stderr is even more useful than simple when you're using i=
t under gdb.

Agreed, trace control seems really useful with stderr, and we should be a=
ble to
do this in a generic way (shared by simple and stderr backends).

--=20
Fabien Chouteau