[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <y0my7kyldqt.fsf@ton.toronto.redhat.com>
Date: 11 Apr 2007 18:58:50 -0400
From: fche@...hat.com (Frank Ch. Eigler)
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Russell King <rmk@....linux.org.uk>,
systemtap@...rces.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] markers-linker-generic
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> writes:
> [...] I am told that the systemtap developers plan to (or are)
> using this infrastructure.
Indeed.
> If correct: what is their reason for preferring it over kprobes?
> [...]
It's not a preference - it's more of a supplement. It's helpful when
some combination of such factors exists:
- kprobe int3-fault dispatching overhead orders of magnitude too high
- fault dispatching not permissible in some areas
- local context variables not easily retrievable via dwarf information
- dwarf information not available at all
- costs of permanently placed but passive marker acceptable
>From systemtap's point of view, instrumentation hooked to markers,
kprobes, and other facilities like timers, coexist just fine. A
greater number of probe-able event sources makes for a richer tool.
- FChE
-
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