linux-kernel - Re: tracepoint maintainance models

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]

Message-ID: <20060918005624.GA30835@elte.hu>
Date:	Mon, 18 Sep 2006 02:56:24 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Karim Yaghmour <karim@...rsys.com>
Cc:	Nicholas Miell <nmiell@...cast.net>,
	Paul Mundt <lethal@...ux-sh.org>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Jes Sorensen <jes@....com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
	Roman Zippel <zippel@...ux-m68k.org>,
	Tom Zanussi <zanussi@...ibm.com>,
	Richard J Moore <richardj_moore@...ibm.com>,
	"Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@...hat.com>,
	Michel Dagenais <michel.dagenais@...ymtl.ca>,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	William Cohen <wcohen@...hat.com>,
	"Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@...igh.org>
Subject: Re: tracepoint maintainance models

* Karim Yaghmour <karim@...rsys.com> wrote:

> There is, actually, no reason to believe that end-users of dynamic 
> trace infrastructures are any more tolerant to breakage than, say, 
> those of the *old* ltt. [...]

are you saying that if i replaced half of the static markups with 
function attributes (which would still provide equivalent functionality 
to dynamic tracers), or if i removed a few dozen static markups with 
dynamic scripts (which change too would be transparent to users of 
dynamic tracers), that in this case users of static tracers would /not/ 
claim that tracing broke?

i fully understand that you can _teach_ the removal of static 
tracepoints to LTT (and i'd expect no less from a tracer), but will 
users accept the regression? I claim that they wont, and that's the 
important issue. Frankly, i find it highly amusing that such seemingly 
simple points have to be argued for such a long time. Is this really 
necessary?

(since the rest of your mail seems to build on this premise, i'll wait 
for your reply before replying to the rest.)

	Ingo
-
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/