[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87fvq9cwlk.fsf@tassilo.jf.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2013 16:01:59 -0800
From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
Tom Zanussi <tom.zanussi@...ux.intel.com>,
Jovi Zhangwei <jovi.zhangwei@...il.com>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH tip 0/5] tracing filters with BPF
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com> writes:
Can you do some performance comparison compared to e.g. ktap?
How much faster is it?
While it sounds interesting, I would strongly advise to make this
capability only available to root. Traditionally lots of complex byte
code languages which were designed to be "safe" and verifiable weren't
really. e.g. i managed to crash things with "safe" systemtap multiple
times. And we all know what happened to Java.
So the likelyhood of this having some hole somewhere (either in
the byte code or in some library function) is high.
-Andi
--
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