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]

Message-ID: <450ED213.9000603@mbligh.org>
Date:	Mon, 18 Sep 2006 10:06:27 -0700
From:	Martin Bligh <mbligh@...igh.org>
To:	Jes Sorensen <jes@....com>
Cc:	karim@...rsys.com, Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, tglx@...utronix.de,
	Paul Mundt <lethal@...ux-sh.org>,
	Roman Zippel <zippel@...ux-m68k.org>,
	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

> And it doesn't address the following issues:
> 
> a) The static community providing actual evidence that dynamic tracing
>    is noticably slower.

...

> Everything has performance limitations, you keep running around touting
> that static is the only thing thats not a problem. Now show us the
> numbers!

When comparing two different approaches to a problem, it is unreasonable
and disingenuous to try to force the onus on the proponents of one
particular approach to do all the benchmarking for both sides. Everybody
has to help try to find the correct solution.

Furthermore, Mathieu already did provide numbers, if you go back and
look.

> The problems pointed out with LTT are *conceptual*, but of course you
> keep ignoring the facts and refusing to provide real numbers.

This is getting very silly, and unnecessarily abusive. Real problems
exist on both sides of the fence, which have been discussed ad nauseam.
If you don't recall them, then go back and read the thread again. The
question is how to strike a comprimise between two different set of
problems, which Ingo and Karim actually seemed to be making progress
on towards the end of the thread.

M.
-
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/