Re: [PATCH] markers-linker-generic

[Frank Ch. Eigler]

Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> [...]  I am told that the systemtap developers plan to (or are)
> using this infrastructure.

Indeed.

> If correct: what is their reason for preferring it over kprobes?
> [...]

It's not a preference - it's more of a supplement.  It's helpful when
some combination of such factors exists:

- kprobe int3-fault dispatching overhead orders of magnitude too high
- fault dispatching not permissible in some areas
- local context variables not easily retrievable via dwarf information
- dwarf information not available at all
- costs of permanently placed but passive marker acceptable

>From systemtap's point of view, instrumentation hooked to markers,
kprobes, and other facilities like timers, coexist just fine.  A
greater number of probe-able event sources makes for a richer tool.


- FChE
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/