Re: Enhance perf to support KVM

Paolo Bonzini
2010-03-02T16:46:10Z

On 02/26/2010 03:23 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> I do think tools/X and tools/libc would make quite a bit of sense - this is
> one of the better design aspects of FreeBSD et al. It's a mistake that it's
> not being done.

I don't see what it would buy to have tools/libc. You cannot force
users to update kernel-space and user-space in lockstep (Apple forced
you to do that sometimes when I used Macs at work, and it was very very
inconvenient), so it's not like libc would be able to always assume the
latest system calls. There is (relatively) a lot of
backwards-compatibility code in libc; it's ugly code, but you have to
live with it.

Any case in which you need lockstep upgrades of kernel and libc for
bisectability is a bug in libc, and I haven't seen it happen enough to
be a problem.

Paolo

ps: does it make sense to keep such a long list of recipients???