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:	Fri, 15 Sep 2006 19:32:06 +0100
From:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To:	Chuck Ebbert <76306.1226@...puserve.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/11] LTTng-core (basic tracing infrastructure) 0.5.108

Ar Gwe, 2006-09-15 am 13:14 -0400, ysgrifennodd Chuck Ebbert:
> In-Reply-To: <1158331071.29932.63.camel@...alhost.localdomain>
> > > $ grep KPROBES arch/*/Kconf*
> > > arch/i386/Kconfig:config KPROBES
> > > arch/ia64/Kconfig:config KPROBES
> > > arch/powerpc/Kconfig:config KPROBES
> > > arch/sparc64/Kconfig:config KPROBES
> > > arch/x86_64/Kconfig:config KPROBES
> >
> > Send patches. The fact nobody has them implemented on your platform
> > isn't a reason to implement something else, quite the reverse in fact.
> 
> Yes, but the point is: until that's done you can't claim kprobes is a
> valid tracing tool for everyone.

I can however claim that kprobes is what they should be implementing not
adding new large patches for another infrastructure whose author has
already said for dynamic stuff it is based on the same things.


-
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/