Re: tracepoint maintainance models

[Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>]

* Theodore Tso <tytso@mit.edu> wrote:

> On Mon, Sep 18, 2006 at 05:30:27AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > Amazing! So the trace data provided by those removed static markups 
> > (which were moved into dynamic scripts and are thus still fully 
> > available to dynamic tracers) are still available to LTT users? How is 
> > that possible, via quantum tunneling perhaps? ;-)
> 
> I *think* what Karim is trying to claim is that LTT also has some 
> dynamic capabilities, and isn't a pure static tracing system.  But if 
> that's the case, I don't understand why LTT and SystemTap can't just 
> merge and play nice together....

oh, that merge was certainly my suggestion from the very beginning of 
this "discussion". And no, LTT has no kprobe capabilities at the moment, 
it is a pure static tracer, but i'm still hoping that Karim stops doing 
this what i believe to be a pointless Don Quijote fight (which i believe 
keeps Mathieu from making the right technical decision), and lets LTT 
adopt to the times and integrate SystemTap. But hey, it's really his 
problem and not mine in the first place. I certainly have my share of 
fun and i even get to write code :)

	Ingo