linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/11] LTTng-core (basic tracing infrastructure) 0.5.108

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sun, 17 Sep 2006 18:02:37 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Roman Zippel <zippel@...ux-m68k.org>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
cc:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, karim@...rsys.com,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
	Paul Mundt <lethal@...ux-sh.org>, Jes Sorensen <jes@....com>,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>,
	Tom Zanussi <zanussi@...ibm.com>, ltt-dev@...fik.org,
	Michel Dagenais <michel.dagenais@...ymtl.ca>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/11] LTTng-core (basic tracing infrastructure) 0.5.108

Hi,

On Sun, 17 Sep 2006, Ingo Molnar wrote:

> > The foremost issue is still that there is only limited kprobes 
> > support.
> 
> > The main issue in supporting static tracers are the tracepoints and so 
> > far I haven't seen any convincing proof that the maintainance overhead 
> > of dynamic and static tracepoints has to be significantly different.
> 
> to both points i (and others) already replied in great detail - please 
> follow up on them. (I can quote message-IDs if you cannot find them.)

What you basically tell me is (rephrased to make it more clear): Implement 
kprobes support or fuck off! You make it very clear, that you're unwilling 
to support static tracers even to point to make _any_ static trace support 
impossible. It's impossible to discuss this with you, because you're 
absolutely unwilling to make any concessions. What am I supposed to do 
than it's very clear to me, that you don't want to make any compromise 
anyway? You leave me _nothing_ to work with, that's the main reason I 
leave such things unanswered. AFAICT there is nothing I can do about that 
than just repeating what I told you already anyway and you'll continue to 
ignore it and I'm sick and tired of it.

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