[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0609191517300.6761@scrub.home>
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2006 15:25:46 +0200 (CEST)
From: Roman Zippel <zippel@...ux-m68k.org>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Nicholas Miell <nmiell@...cast.net>,
Paul Mundt <lethal@...ux-sh.org>,
Karim Yaghmour <karim@...rsys.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Jes Sorensen <jes@....com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.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>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
William Cohen <wcohen@...hat.com>,
"Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@...igh.org>
Subject: Re: tracing - consensus building insteat of dogfights
Hi,
On Tue, 19 Sep 2006, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> *) so far everyone but Roman seems to agree we want to support dynamic
> tracing as an integral part of the tracing framework
Actually I don't disagree at all, I'm sorry if I have been so easy to
misunderstand. All I'm asking for is to make static tracing possible if
reasonably possible. I know that pure static tracing will always be second
choice, but if we can _reasonably_ support it, why shouldn't we do 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists