[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110310183305.GD12521@home.goodmis.org>
Date:	Thu, 10 Mar 2011 13:33:06 -0500
From:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc:	Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, jan.kratochvil@...hat.com,
	Denys Vlasenko <vda.linux@...glemail.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] Proposal for ptrace improvements
On Wed, Mar 09, 2011 at 11:28:55AM +0100, Tejun Heo wrote:
> 
> If someone is looking for completely transparent light weight
> monitoring, there is a much better fitting mechanism for that and it
> works frigging well and provides much better insight into what's going
> on with the system.
> 
> Use tracing for tracing.
> 
Hmm, what tracing utility exactly? If I want to trace a running task,
that I have the debug info on it where I would have the ability to
insert probes, which utility would you recommend?
strace and gdb use ptrace
ftrace focuses on the kernel.
I don't think perf has a good way to trace userspace yet.
I haven't taken a good look at lttng, but I think it has some sort of
library that is attached to the process. Is there a better way than
attching a library to said task.
systemtap may have ways too, but I think it depends on utrace which has
pretty much been nak'd in the kernel.
-- Steve
--
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