On Mon, 12 Aug 2013, Ingo Molnar wrote: > perf is the exact opposite: no split-up the development culture because > they are closely related, yet a relatively disciplined ABI between the > components. In fact the ABI is higher quality exactly because development > is more integrated and allows for ABI problems to be resolved before they > leak out. It also allows for faster iteration of development, without > nonsensical ABI steps pulluting the way.
I don't know if I'd use "quality" and "perf ABI" in the same sentence. It's a horrible ABI; it has the honor of having the longest syscall manpage, beating out even ptrace. It also really isn't that stable; I've had perf ABI changes break programs I maintain at least three times in the last 2 kernel releases. Part of this is due to the tight coupling into the kernel, in fact the only ABI anyone seems to care about is that presented by the perf-tool CLI interface; the _actual_ kernel ABI seems like an afterthought. Vince -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
