* Frédéric Weisbecker <fweis...@gmail.com> wrote: > 2009/1/29 Ingo Molnar <mi...@elte.hu>: > >> > >> Several people talked me about utrace and gave some examples about it in > >> this discussion. The Api is very convenient to fetch syscall numbers, > >> arguments and return values. And the hooks are done in the generic core > >> code, so it is arch independent. > >> > >> The only drawback I can see is that it is not yet merged upstream, in > >> need of in-kernel users. If it only depends on this condition, we could > >> be these users... > >> > >> What do you think? > > > > sure - how do the minimal bits/callbacks look like which enable syscall > > tracing? > > > > Ingo > > > There is a very straightforward example provided by Ananth in there: > http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/1/28/59
I mean, how does the infrastructure patch look like - what code does this add to the kernel - just to get the syscall tracing bits. Lets get some progress here - it's clear that tracing syscalls is good, we just need to do it and look at actual patches. Ingo