From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262391AbVGLUok (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Jul 2005 16:44:40 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261945AbVGLUoc (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Jul 2005 16:44:32 -0400 Received: from e1.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.141]:5097 "EHLO e1.ny.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262397AbVGLUoP (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Jul 2005 16:44:15 -0400 Message-ID: <42D42B91.3080608@us.ibm.com> Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 13:44:01 -0700 From: Vara Prasad User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 (ax) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: =?ISO-8859-2?Q?Tomasz_K=B3oczko?= CC: Tom Zanussi , akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, karim@opersys.com, varap@us.ibm.com, richardj_moore@uk.ibm.com Subject: Re: Merging relayfs? References: <17107.6290.734560.231978@tut.ibm.com> <17107.57046.817407.562018@tut.ibm.com> <17107.61271.924455.965538@tut.ibm.com> <17107.64629.717907.706682@tut.ibm.com> <17108.1906.628755.613285@tut.ibm.com> <17108.5721.202275.377020@tut.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-2; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Tomasz Kłoczko wrote: > On Tue, 12 Jul 2005, Tom Zanussi wrote: > [..] > >> > This is much more simpler and much better for control (also from >> point of >> > view caching bugs in agregator code -> also from point of view kernel >> > stability). >> > >> > Also .. probably some code for handle i.e. counters cen be the same as >> > existing code in current kernel. >> > Probably some "atomic" (and/or simpler) agregators can be usefull >> in other >> > places in kernel for collecting some data during all time when system >> > works .. so code for handle this can be reused in non-ocasinal >> > tracing/measuring. >> > And again: all without things like relayfs. >> >> Well, you should check out the sytemtap project. It's basically a >> DTrace clone which is already doing these kinds of things with >> kprobes, and it's using relayfs... > > > Probaly by this it will be harder to say "KProbes it is Solaris DTrace > clone". > I have not looked at Dtrace code but based on their USENIX paper looks like we can not call Systemtap as Dtrace clone without a buffering scheme like relayfs. > kloczek