[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <m1zljn7yx9.fsf@frodo.ebiederm.org>
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 23:02:10 -0800
From: ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
containers@...ts.osdl.org, fweisbec@...il.com,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, srostedt@...hat.com,
Sukadev Bhattiprolu <sukadev@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] ftrace: add function tracing to single thread
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> writes:
> i dont see the point of the complexity you are advocating. 99.9% of
> the users run a unique PID space.
I'm not advocating complexity. I'm advocating using the same APIs as
the rest of the kernel, for doing the same functions.
> Tracing is about keeping stuff simple. On containers we could also
> trace the namespace ID (is there an easy ID for the namespace, as an
> easy extension to the very nice PID concept that Unix introduced
> decades ago?) and be done with it.
I don't really care about the pid namespace in this context.
I am just asking that we compare a different field in the task struct.
I am asking that we don't accumulate new users of an old crufty bug prone
API, for no good reason.
I'm asking that we don't be different for no good reason.
Eric
--
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