From: "Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@redhat.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
utrace-devel@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] utrace-based ftrace "process" engine, v2
Date: Sat, 21 Mar 2009 17:48:52 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090321214852.GA5262@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090321154501.GA2707@elte.hu>
Hi -
On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 04:45:01PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> [...]
> To me personally there are two big direct usability issues with
> SystemTap:
>
> 1) It relies on DEBUG_INFO for any reasonable level of utility.
> Yes, it will limp along otherwise as well, but most of the
> actual novel capabilities depend on debuginfo. Which is an
> acceptable constraint for enterprise usage where kernels are
> switched every few months and having a debuginfo package is not
> a big issue. Not acceptable for upstream kernel development.
In my own limited kernel-building experience, I find the debuginfo
data conveniently and instantly available after every "make". Can you
elaborate how is it harder for you to incidentally make it than for
someone to download it?
> It also puts way too trust into the compiler generating 1GB+ of
> debuginfo correctly. I want to be able to rely on tools all the
> time and thus i want tools to have some really simple and
> predictable foundations.
Well, the data has to come from *somewhere*. We know several
shortcomings (and have staff working on gcc debuginfo improvements),
but there is little alternative. If not from the compiler, where are
you going to get detailed type/structure layouts? Stack slot to
variable mappings? Statement-level PC addresses? Unwind data?
> 2) It's not upstream and folks using it seem to insist on not
> having it upstream ;-) This 'distance' to upstream seems to have
> grown during the past few years - instead of shrinking. [...]
Considering our upstream-bound assistance with foundation technologies
like markers, tracepoints, kprobes, utrace, and several other bits,
this does not seem entirely fair.
> If these fundamental problems are addressed then i'd even argue for
> the totality of SystemTap to be aimed upstreamed (including the
> scripting language, etc.), [...]
If consensus on this were plausible, we could seriously discuss it.
But I don't buy the package-deal that utrace must not attempt merging
on its own merits, just because it makes systemtap (as it is today)
useful to more people.
- FChE
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-03-21 21:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 53+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-03-21 1:39 [PATCH 0/3] utrace Roland McGrath
2009-03-21 1:41 ` [PATCH 1/3] signals: tracehook_notify_jctl change Roland McGrath
2009-03-21 1:41 ` [PATCH 2/3] utrace core Roland McGrath
2009-03-21 8:49 ` Andrew Morton
2009-03-21 14:08 ` Renzo Davoli
2009-03-21 14:34 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-03-21 16:37 ` Renzo Davoli
2009-03-21 16:44 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-03-23 4:34 ` Roland McGrath
2009-03-23 4:35 ` Roland McGrath
2009-03-23 10:57 ` Will Newton
2009-03-21 1:42 ` [PATCH 3/3] utrace-based ftrace "process" engine, v2 Roland McGrath
2009-03-21 7:43 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-03-21 8:39 ` Andrew Morton
2009-03-21 9:12 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-03-21 11:19 ` Andrew Morton
2009-03-21 11:51 ` Frank Ch. Eigler
2009-03-21 12:04 ` Andrew Morton
2009-03-21 12:57 ` Frank Ch. Eigler
2009-03-21 15:45 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-03-21 20:35 ` Diego Calleja
2009-03-22 12:17 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-03-21 21:34 ` Andrew Morton
2009-03-21 21:51 ` Frank Ch. Eigler
2009-03-21 22:02 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-03-21 22:20 ` Frank Ch. Eigler
2009-03-21 22:37 ` Alexey Dobriyan
2009-03-21 23:38 ` Frank Ch. Eigler
2009-03-22 10:25 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-03-23 5:33 ` Roland McGrath
2009-03-23 5:20 ` Roland McGrath
2009-03-22 12:37 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-03-23 13:48 ` Alexey Dobriyan
2009-03-23 15:14 ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-03-23 21:44 ` Theodore Tso
2009-03-30 22:18 ` Andrew Morton
2009-03-30 22:52 ` Frank Ch. Eigler
2009-03-31 9:17 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-03-31 11:27 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-03-31 11:38 ` Frank Ch. Eigler
2009-03-31 16:25 ` Christoph Hellwig
2009-03-31 20:54 ` Roland McGrath
2009-03-21 21:48 ` Frank Ch. Eigler [this message]
2009-03-22 12:08 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-03-22 12:53 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-03-23 20:25 ` Frank Ch. Eigler
2009-03-23 20:39 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-03-23 5:09 ` Roland McGrath
2009-03-24 5:29 ` Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli
2009-03-24 5:54 ` Andrew Morton
2009-03-24 6:10 ` Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli
2009-03-23 4:49 ` Roland McGrath
2009-03-23 6:34 ` Ingo Molnar
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=20090321214852.GA5262@redhat.com \
--to=fche@redhat.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=roland@redhat.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=utrace-devel@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