linux-kernel - Re: [ltt-dev] LTTng kernel integration roadmap, update

Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Date:	Fri, 28 Nov 2008 07:58:09 -0500
From:	Mathieu Desnoyers <compudj@...stal.dyndns.org>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Sam@...p.polymtl.ca,
	Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	ltt-dev@...ts.casi.polymtl.ca, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [ltt-dev] LTTng kernel integration roadmap, update

* Andrew Morton (akpm@...ux-foundation.org) wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Nov 2008 11:58:40 -0500 (EST) Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote:
> 
> > > The question that prevails is therefore : should we ship userspace
> > > binary with the kernel tree at all ? And if yes, how should the resuting
> > > executables be packaged and deployed ? Should it be installed in the
> > > system along with kernel modules or should it be populated into a
> > > filesystem populated by kernelspace ?
> > > 
> > > Or is it better to do as we have always done and keep the userspace
> > > tools separated from the kernel tree ?
> > 
> > I say keep the user space tools separate as much as possible.
> 
> So...  we're now planning to build even more userspace tools into the
> kernel merely because we don't know how to deliver userspace tools in
> userspace?
> 
> Worse, those kernel-based userspace tools will simply be presenting a
> textual form of something which the kernel already makes available in a
> binary form?
> 
> This is so lame.
> 
> Any proposal to fix all this will result in vast amounts of
> inconclusive chin-scratching again.  Last time this came up, we ended
> up with the old impractical put-it-in-util-linux chestnut.  I think the
> time has come for us to admit that this isn't working out.
> 
> Mathieu, if you're feeling keen I'd suggest that you just type `mkdir
> -p userspace/lttng' and build your userspace tools in there.  One they
> are there and real, the issues around versioning, installation and
> delivery will still need tobe sorted out, but we need to start
> somewhere.
> 

Yes, I like the idea of having a kernel-developer oriented version of
the userspace tools, which may not have packaging requirements as strong
as standard userspace packages. Just keeping them around with the kernel
build tree would be a good start, and we could probably go as far as
installing them along with the kernel modules in /lib/modules/`uname
-r`.

Mathieu


> 
> _______________________________________________
> ltt-dev mailing list
> ltt-dev@...ts.casi.polymtl.ca
> http://lists.casi.polymtl.ca/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ltt-dev
> 

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
OpenPGP key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F  BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68
--
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/

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