From: "Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@redhat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@redhat.com>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
systemtap-ml <systemtap@sources.redhat.com>,
Hideo AOKI <haoki@redhat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][Patch 2/2] markers: example of irq regular kernel markers
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2008 14:02:03 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080621180203.GA11804@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1214064834.3223.231.camel@lappy.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Hi -
On Sat, Jun 21, 2008 at 06:13:54PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> [...] I think what Frank refers to here is why not scatter the
> kernel code with trace_mark()s on every conceivable location like
> you do with printk-style debugging.
It's not fair to caricaturize my suggestions this way ("every
conceivable location").
> Those trace marks might help out when $customer's kernel goes splat
> and you don't want to provide him with a custom kernel.
Right.
> I do think we must make a clear distinction between these cases because:
>
> 1) tracers provide a kernel<->user interface - and whilst we don't
> have a stable in-kernel API/ABI we are anal about the kernel/user
> boundary. Andrew also greatly worries about this aspect.
Well, how to set Andrew's mind at ease then, beyond what we've already
said? Back a few months ago, both systemtap and lttng guys - the
primary user-space clients - have said that we are fine with this
interface changing. We each have mechanisms to adapt.
> 2) it highly uglyfies the code, Frank doesn't need to maintain it,
> so its easy for him to say. But IMHO its much harder to read code
> that is littered with debug statements that it is to read regular
> code.
Then don't put too many in, or hide them with inline functions.
> 3) it bloats the kernel,.. while it may not be fast path bloat, all
> that marker stuff does go somewhere.
That bloat has been quantified and appears negligible in space and time.
> So, while I see the value of 'stable' mark sites for 'stable'
> events, I'm dead-set against littering the kernel with markers just
> because we can, and hoping they might some day be useful for
> someone.
We're in violent agreement. No one suggested "littering just because
we can". The initial lttng suite of markers consisted of about one
hundred *in total*. If some other subsystem maintainer runs amok and
adds thousands, please take it up with them, not with us.
- FChE
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-06-21 18:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 45+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-06-20 17:03 [RFC][Patch 2/2] markers: example of irq regular kernel markers Masami Hiramatsu
2008-06-20 17:45 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-06-20 19:34 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2008-06-21 10:12 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-06-21 14:36 ` Steven Rostedt
2008-06-21 14:53 ` Frank Ch. Eigler
2008-06-21 15:07 ` Steven Rostedt
2008-06-21 16:13 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-06-21 18:02 ` Frank Ch. Eigler [this message]
2008-06-22 4:31 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2008-06-23 2:19 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-06-21 19:39 ` Frank Ch. Eigler
2008-06-22 4:00 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2008-06-20 20:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-06-22 17:11 ` [RFC] Tracepoint proposal Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-06-22 17:59 ` Alexey Dobriyan
2008-06-22 18:27 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-06-24 0:20 ` Alexey Dobriyan
2008-06-24 4:01 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2008-06-24 7:15 ` Takashi Nishiie
2008-06-24 11:55 ` Frank Ch. Eigler
2008-06-24 16:04 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2008-06-24 16:21 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-06-24 17:01 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2008-06-24 17:46 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-06-25 23:52 ` [RFC PATCH] Kernel Tracepoints Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-06-26 21:02 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2008-06-27 13:14 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-06-27 22:45 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2008-06-30 15:43 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-06-27 13:15 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-06-30 19:38 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2008-06-27 13:30 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-06-27 20:58 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2008-06-30 15:40 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-06-30 19:58 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2008-07-03 15:12 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-07-03 18:51 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2008-06-27 13:36 ` [RFC PATCH] Kernel Tracepoints (update) Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-07-03 15:27 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2008-07-03 15:47 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-07-03 18:18 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-07-03 18:46 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2008-06-25 23:55 ` [RFC PATCH] Tracepoint sched probes Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-06-24 3:09 ` [RFC] Tracepoint proposal Masami Hiramatsu
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20080621180203.GA11804@redhat.com \
--to=fche@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=haoki@redhat.com \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca \
--cc=mhiramat@redhat.com \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=systemtap@sources.redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox