Re: [RFC] systemtap: begin the process of using proper kernel APIs (part1: use kprobe symbol_name/offset instead of address)
From: Frank Ch. Eigler
Date: Tue Jul 22 2008 - 14:50:23 EST
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>> > You will have to weigh that against the benefits of making
>> > systemtap generally useful for kernel developers [...]
>> Understood & agreed, Rik. If an issue arises where there is genuine
>> conflict between kernel-developer-usability and something else, we'll
>> try to solve it favouring the former if at all possible.
>> (The kprobes addressing argument cannot reasonably be placed into this
> You have your viewpoint inverted, if the kernel developers think you
> have a problem, and you fail to address it, they will walk away.
> If you want the kernel people to endorse your project, you'll have
> to please them. It's that simple. [...]
We have and will try to accomodate anything reasonable. I trust no
one is suggesting that every systemtap-related suggestion from lkml is
to be treated as if infallible, and that we can continue to debate the
wisdom of each idea on its merits.
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/