[issue28909] Adding LTTng-UST tracing support

Peter McCormick added the comment: I would like to propose the following patch[0] which generalizes the `PyDTrace_*` definitions to a more generic `PyProbe` structure, in anticipation of including LTTng support side-by-side with the existing DTrace support. A couple of argument types in

[issue28909] Adding LTTng-UST tracing support

Francis Deslauriers added the comment: Hi all, It seems that, as of right now, the thing blocking this patchset from going forward is the name of the intrumentation point. Two naming approached were suggested: - Keeping PyDtrace* - Changing to PyProbe* I prefer the PyProbe

[issue28909] Adding LTTng-UST tracing support

Francis Deslauriers added the comment: Hi all, Is there anything I can do to move this patch-set forward? @Charalampos, I will make sure to include this in the patch. Thank you. -- ___ Python tracker

[issue28909] Adding LTTng-UST tracing support

Charalampos Stratakis added the comment: Just a small note here for the documentation patch. yum is deprecated in Fedora, and dnf is now the default package manager, so the respective instructions for Fedora should reflect that. -- nosy: +cstratak

[issue28909] Adding LTTng-UST tracing support

Changes by cburroughs : -- nosy: +cburroughs ___ Python tracker ___ ___

[issue28909] Adding LTTng-UST tracing support

Francis Deslauriers added the comment: Here is the documentation patch. -- Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file46695/0003-Documentation-of-LTTng-UST-tracing-instrumentation.patch ___ Python tracker

[issue28909] Adding LTTng-UST tracing support

Francis Deslauriers added the comment: > What about `PyProbe`? Given the multitude of tools and techniques in this > space, wouldn't it be worthwhile to clarify things before adding this? I > think conflating `dtrace` and `lttng` would only lead to more confusion for > users as they really

[issue28909] Adding LTTng-UST tracing support

Peter McCormick added the comment: Hi Łukasz, thank you for the feedback! > "PyTrace" is already a name in use for a different purpose. I understand the > itch to make the name more "right" but I am in general not a fan of renaming > "PyDTrace" to anything else now. It was a placeholder from

[issue28909] Adding LTTng-UST tracing support

Francis Deslauriers added the comment: I am finally having the time to work in this. > A nit: the name LTTng-UST is rather unfriendly, especially when used without > the dash and in all lowercase characters. Given that we're using "dtrace" and > "systemtap", it would be simpler to just use

[issue28909] Adding LTTng-UST tracing support

Łukasz Langa added the comment: Thanks for working on this! A few thoughts. 1. Keep the existing names. "PyTrace" is already a name in use for a different purpose. I understand the itch to make the name more "right" but I am in general not a fan of renaming "PyDTrace" to anything else now.

[issue28909] Adding LTTng-UST tracing support

Peter McCormick added the comment: A few suggestions: * Disallow `--with-lttngust` on anything other than Linux (on macOS `configure` dies due to differences in acceptable `mktemp` arguments if you even attempt it) * Rename `cpython_inst.h` to `pytrace.h` and rename `pylttngust_probes.h` to

[issue28909] Adding LTTng-UST tracing support

Peter McCormick added the comment: Fork at with Francis' original patch, plus a revert for the DTrace provider name change. Here are instructions I used to try this out: ## LTTng installation Full installation

[issue28909] Adding LTTng-UST tracing support

Francis Deslauriers added the comment: Thanks Łukasz, I will add tests following the example of the DTrace tests and update the Doc/howto/instrumentation.rst file to include this new information. LTTng can be used on all major Linux distros (Ubuntu, Debian, Fedora, etc.) either from

[issue28909] Adding LTTng-UST tracing support

Łukasz Langa added the comment: This looks promising but I don't know how to test it. Tests would be welcome, as well as some explanation what OS and kernel I need to use to test it out. Why does your patch rename the DTrace provider from "python" to "cpython"? At this point, with release of

[issue28909] Adding LTTng-UST tracing support

Changes by Łukasz Langa : -- assignee: -> lukasz.langa ___ Python tracker ___ ___

[issue28909] Adding LTTng-UST tracing support

Changes by Francis Deslauriers : -- nosy: +jcea ___ Python tracker ___ ___

[issue28909] Adding LTTng-UST tracing support

Changes by Zachary Ware : -- nosy: +lukasz.langa ___ Python tracker ___ ___

[issue28909] Adding LTTng-UST tracing support

New submission from Francis Deslauriers: This patch extends the tracing infrastructure to support LTTng UserSpace Tracer. Using LTTng-UST, users would have access to a low overhead tracing done entirely from userspace. Depending on the tracing configure option used (none, --with-dtrace or