Thanks I understand better, I had missed the "Result of Jan 2010 uprobes review and NAK of utrace" from IBM presentation. I generally prefer to have all the features (what utrace provides) but I am still looking for ARM utrace so I have to see uptake of both among ARM users.
Hey we almost doubled mailing list archive in not so much time ;-) Regards Fred Frederic Turgis OMAP Platform Business Unit - OMAP System Engineering - Platform Enablement Texas Instruments France SA, 821 Avenue Jack Kilby, 06270 Villeneuve Loubet. 036 420 040 R.C.S Antibes. Capital de EUR 753.920 -----Original Message----- From: Frank Ch. Eigler [mailto:f...@redhat.com] Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2011 7:51 PM To: Turgis, Frederic Cc: utrace-devel@redhat.com; Mark Wielaard Subject: Re: utrace support on ARM f-turgis wrote: > [...] > So I am interested in this kind of status: > > * utrace has not been accepted upstream. Does it mean it may lose > traction ? Is "community" pushing for something else or happy with > what they have ? [...] There are many communities. I am not anticipating additional utrace uptake at this time. > * I have also found IBM presentation on utrace-less uprobes. How does > it affect utrace ? It doesn't. As far as systemtap's concerned, if the new uprobes turn out to be versatile enough, we will use them. As far as a systemtap user's concerned, it's all an implementation detail. The scripts should be exactly the same. - FChE
