[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1001251605320.3574@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2010 16:07:21 -0800 (PST)
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Renzo Davoli <renzo@...unibo.it>
cc: Mark Wielaard <mjw@...hat.com>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Kyle Moffett <kyle@...fetthome.net>, tytso@....edu,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Fr??d??ric Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
"Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@...hat.com>, linux-next@...r.kernel.org,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, utrace-devel@...hat.com,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: linux-next: add utrace tree
On Tue, 26 Jan 2010, Renzo Davoli wrote:
>
> The solution is that everybody can code his/her optimized kernel/user
> interface for tracing in his/her kernel module, i.e. utrace.
I don't think people understand. That is simply not a "solution". That is
a PROBLEM. The thing you describe is an absolute disaster. Which is
exactly why I rant against it.
The last thing we want to have is "here, take this, and make your own
kernel module mess around it optimized for your particular crazy
scenario".
But every SINGLE post in this thread that has argued for utrace has argued
exactly this way.
Linus
--
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