| 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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2008 20:47:12 -0700 From: "Martin Bligh" <mbligh@...gle.com> To: "Andi Kleen" <andi@...stfloor.org> Cc: "Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, "Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@...utronix.de>, "Mathieu Desnoyers" <compudj@...stal.dyndns.org>, "Steven Rostedt" <rostedt@...dmis.org>, od@...ell.com, "Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@...hat.com> Subject: Re: Unified tracing buffer >> During kernel summit and Plumbers conference, Linus and others >> expressed a desire for a unified >> tracing buffer system for multiple tracing applications (eg ftrace, >> lttng, systemtap, blktrace, etc) to use. > > This is what relayfs always was promised to be, but apparently > never quite became. But before adding a new one I would recommend > to remove relayfs first. It's a little different, though similar. relayfs is an unstructured buffer. This would be a sequence of events with a common timestamp format, and hopefully other commonalties too. I agree that the underlying buffer structure could be shared, as has been pointed out (buried in this long thread). However, in another buried comment, it was pointed out that relayfs would have no users once this was done, so ... I don't think we can remove relayfs before adding this and switching over the users though (possibly it could all be done at the same time, but messy) -- 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