Re: [PATCH 1/3] ftrace: add function tracing to single thread

[Ingo Molnar]

* Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> writes:
> 
> > i dont see the point of the complexity you are advocating. 99.9% of 
> > the users run a unique PID space.
> 
> I'm not advocating complexity.  I'm advocating using the same APIs as
> the rest of the kernel, for doing the same functions.
> 
> > Tracing is about keeping stuff simple. On containers we could also 
> > trace the namespace ID (is there an easy ID for the namespace, as an 
> > easy extension to the very nice PID concept that Unix introduced 
> > decades ago?) and be done with it.
> 
> I don't really care about the pid namespace in this context.
> 
> I am just asking that we compare a different field in the task 
> struct.
> 
> I am asking that we don't accumulate new users of an old crufty bug 
> prone API, for no good reason.

i dont disagree about the change, but i'm curious, what's bug-prone 
about current->pid? It certainly worked quite well for the first 15 
years.

	Ingo
--
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/