Re: [PATCH 0/31] utrace for 3.1 kernel
On 02/06/2012 06:24 PM, Ying, Victor wrote: I have problem to checkout utrace via git clone git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/oleg/misc.git utrace-3.0, it always reports fatal: the remote end hung up unexpectedly; I tried both utrace-3.0 and utrace-3.1, none of them works. I don't think Oleg has restored his account since kernel.org was rebuilt. He's been posting utrace on github instead, so try: git://github.com/utrace/linux.git Josh
Re: [PATCH 0/31] utrace for 3.1 kernel
On 08/03/2011 12:08 PM, Oleg Nesterov wrote: On 08/02, Oleg Nesterov wrote: utrace patches for 3.1 kernel. Untested, will try to do some tests tomorrow. I tried to test it a bit, seems to work. But see the new [PATCH 31/31] utrace_resume: check irqs_disabled() to shut up lockdep. I saw that Dave already applied this on rawhide, so really just FYI -- it also seems to work well in a few systemtap smoketests I tried on kernel 3.1.0-0.rc0.git19.1.fc17. Thanks! Josh
Re: [RFC v2 00/19] utrace for 3.0 kernel
On 06/30/2011 05:20 PM, Oleg Nesterov wrote: TODO: - Testing. I ran the whole systemtap testsuite with a kernel built from your git tree, and did not see any utrace-specific issues. Thanks! Josh
Re: [PATCH 1/4] ptrace: temporary revert the recent ptrace/jobctl rework
On 06/20/2011 09:44 AM, Dave Jones wrote: What benefit is there in continuing to carry this thing at all ? Utrace has been an absolute disaster from a merging standpoint. Even Xen didn't take this long to get upstream. I can't dispute the upstream disappointment, but the obvious benefit is enabling uprobes for systemtap. There are a growing number of packages building in markers with systemtap-sdt-devel for debugging and tracing, so they will expect a way to hook into these. Yes, the impending inode-uprobes will be sufficient for this case, but it's a step backwards in other respects as well. Josh
Re: [PATCH 1/4] ptrace: temporary revert the recent ptrace/jobctl rework
On 06/20/2011 10:28 AM, Dave Jones wrote: On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 10:18:26AM -0700, Josh Stone wrote: On 06/20/2011 09:44 AM, Dave Jones wrote: What benefit is there in continuing to carry this thing at all ? Utrace has been an absolute disaster from a merging standpoint. Even Xen didn't take this long to get upstream. I can't dispute the upstream disappointment, but the obvious benefit is enabling uprobes for systemtap. There are a growing number of packages building in markers with systemtap-sdt-devel for debugging and tracing, so they will expect a way to hook into these. Yes, the impending inode-uprobes will be sufficient for this case, but it's a step backwards in other respects as well. I'm sure both the Fedora systemtap users will be bummed if it stops working, but the truth is outside of RHEL, and the people who actually work on systemtap, afaics, no-one gives a damn. Packagers are adding these markers of their own accord, and in most cases are getting them upstream as well. It is only kernel developers who are so hostile/apathetic/etc. Josh
