Re: [PATCH 0/11] LTTng-core (basic tracing infrastructure) 0.5.108

[Karim Yaghmour]

Paul Mundt wrote:
> subjective, LTT proved that this was a problem regarding general
> code-level intrusiveness when the number of tracepoints in relatively
> close locality started piling up based on what people considered
> arbitrarily useful, and LTTng doesn't appear to do anything to address
> this.

"LTT proved that ..." what are you talking about? Have you noticed
the posting earlier regarding the fact that the ltt tracepoints did
not change over a 5 year span? **five** years ... Where do you get
this claim that ltt trace points "started piling up"? Have a look
at figure 2 of this article and let me know exactly which of those
tracepoints are actually a problem to you:
http://www.usenix.org/events/usenix2000/general/full_papers/yaghmour/yaghmour_html/index.html

Karim
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/