Re: The demise of utracer.

[Chris Moller]

K.Prasad wrote:

On Tue, Jul 01, 2008 at 03:28:04PM -0400, Chris Moller wrote:

K.Prasad wrote:

Hi All,
        Sorry if I have missed out something I need to know before I
respond to this email. But the "trace" infrastructure (lib/trace.c)
already provides such a facility which more features such as per-cpu
buffer for faster transmission (it is a wrapper over "relay" which
sits on top of "debugfs").

The interfaces provided by "trace" are much simpler/functional than
setting up a "debugfs" interface manually (see
samples/trace/fork_trace.c) and the directory structure and control
files setup by "trace" are already familiar to the systemtap code.

Thanks,
K.Prasad
P.S.: "trace" is currently in -mm tree.

Thought it might be interesting to check this out--the patched 2.6.26-rc5 kernel built fine but panicked when I tried to boot it. So

You might want to directly try out 2.6.26-rc5-mm1 directly. It boots
fine on my T60p with default configs.

Hmmm. okay, I'l try that, thx. (i was using the -mm3 patch and an oldconfig from Fedora i686.)

Thanks,
K.Prasad

--
Chris Moller

 I know that you believe you understand what you think I said, but
 I'm not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.
     -- Robert McCloskey

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature