[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250918112425.23d4d379@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2025 11:24:25 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Fuyu Zhao <zhaofuyu@...o.com>
Cc: ast@...nel.org, daniel@...earbox.net, andrii@...nel.org,
martin.lau@...ux.dev, song@...nel.org, yonghong.song@...ux.dev,
haoluo@...gle.com, jolsa@...nel.org, eddyz87@...il.com, kpsingh@...nel.org,
sdf@...ichev.me, mhiramat@...nel.org, mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com,
shuah@...nel.org, willemb@...gle.com, kerneljasonxing@...il.com,
paul.chaignon@...il.com, chen.dylane@...ux.dev, memxor@...il.com,
martin.kelly@...wdstrike.com, ameryhung@...il.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
yikai.lin@...o.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH bpf-next v1 0/3] bpf: Add BPF program type for
overriding tracepoint probes
On Thu, 18 Sep 2025 20:33:22 +0800
Fuyu Zhao <zhaofuyu@...o.com> wrote:
> At the moment, I don’t have a solid real-world example to provide.
> This work is still in an exploratory stage.
We shouldn't be in the business of "if you build it, they will come".
Unless there is a concrete use case now, I would not be adding anything.
My entire workflow for what I created in the tracing system was "I have a
need, I will implement it". The "need" came first. I then wrote code to
satisfy that need. It should not be the other way around.
-- Steve
Powered by blists - more mailing lists