Re: [RFC] [PATCH] In-kernel gdbstub based on utrace Infrastructure.

[Frank Ch. Eigler]

Hi -

On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 07:16:38PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> [...]
> > The gdbstub prototype was constructed for two reasons: to demonstrate 
> > utrace usage now, and in the future to be incrementally useful (over 
> > ptrace, by moving into fast kernel-space operations like 
> > multithreading control, gdb-tracepoint support, other stuff).  [...]
> 
> What i'd like to see is measurable benefits to users, developers and 
> maintainers. 

OK, it's clear that in the gdb-stub's case, some positive motivation
beyond it being an api-educational example would be appropriate before
merging.  Note that it was only an RFC at the time.


> I'd like to see the same for SystemTap too btw.

systemtap's benefits are beyond question to its users.  (Others are
worried about systemtap problems, but that wasn't your question.)  In
what form do you expect to see such measurements?  It would help if
you could point out prior examples of such "measurable benefit"
analyses that perchance accompanied other then-new kernel features,
say in the tracing/debugging area.


- 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/