Re: [PATCH 3/3] utrace-based ftrace "process" engine, v2

[Andrew Morton]

On Sat, 21 Mar 2009 16:45:01 +0100 Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> 
> [...]
>

useful, thanks.

> Putting utrace upstream now will just make it more 
> convenient to have SystemTap as a separate entity - without any of 
> the benefits. Do we want to do that? Maybe, but we could do better i 
> think.

It would not be good to merge a large kernel feature which kernel
developers and testers cannot test, and regression test.

If testing utrace against its main application requires installation of a
complete enterprise distro from a distro which the particular developer
might not prefer to use then that's quite a problem.

So it is desirable for this reason (and, I suspect, for other reasons) that
systemtap (or a part thereof) be dragged out in some standalone form which
is usable by random mortals.

IOW: I agree.
--
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/