[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2f11576a0804270414t3ef16998me2ff2afd21eedbe7@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2008 20:14:26 +0900
From: "KOSAKI Motohiro" <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
To: "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
"Steven Rostedt" <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
"Mathieu Desnoyers" <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>
Subject: Re: [patch] ftrace, v15
Hi Ingo,
> the current/latest ftrace tree can be pulled from:
>
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mingo/linux-2.6-sched-devel.git
>
> the full diffs are too large to be included here, but the shortlog and
> the diffstat is below. Not much changed in the fundamentals since the
> last lkml posting - but many small details were refined.
I hope ftrace people discussio LTTng people more.
AFAIK nobody explain pros. and cons. ftrace against marker approach.
(of cource, LTTng people doen't explain it too)
I believe tracing feature is very important.
too few discussion is sad ;-)
Why nobody try to integrate ftrace and LTTng?
and, Why don't you separate sched-devel tree and ftrace-devel tree?
--
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