linux-kernel - Re: [RFC tracing] Common Trace Format for Linux (v1.1)

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 11 Nov 2010 07:26:46 -0500
From:	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
To:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...radead.org>,
	David Sharp <dhsharp@...gle.com>,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC tracing] Common Trace Format for Linux (v1.1)

* Thomas Gleixner (tglx@...utronix.de) wrote:
> Mathieu,
> 
> On Wed, 10 Nov 2010, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> 
> > * Thomas Gleixner (tglx@...utronix.de) wrote:
> > [...]
> > 
> > > The requirement list has been beaten to death several times already
> > > along with the various options of trace formats, so we really are at
> > > the point where you folks need to sit down and come up with real code
> > > which can be discussed and improved on a technical base.
> > 
> > I understand and share your frustration about things having been standing still
> > for way too long.
> > 
> > In order to get things rolling, I hereby append my trace format proposal as RFC.
> > I did implement the core elements of it already in the BabelTrace trace
> > converter project, so it's not one of these dreaded "design by committee without
> > any understanding of the practicality aspects" standards. I try make sure it
> > translates to something realistic and useful.
> > 
> > Feedback is welcome, thanks,
> > 
> > Mathieu
> > 
> > RFC: Common Trace Format Proposal for Linux (v1.1)
> 
> Groan. Did you read what I wrote ?
> 
> > >                                              ... so we really are at
> > > the point where you folks need to sit down and come up with real code
> > > which can be discussed and improved on a technical base.
> 
> Your reaction on this is to send yet another proposal, which has not
> really anything new in it.
> 
> What we are waiting for is a sensible incremental patch series, which
> extends or replaces functionality in the existing perf ABI up to the
> point, where we can eventually see the need for a sensible
> replacement. That's the way we work, not with tons of proposals.

OK, I'll work on this. Meanwhile, anyone interested to provide feedback on the
RFC I sent is still welcome to do so.

Thanks,

Mathieu


-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
Operating System Efficiency R&D Consultant
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com
--
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/