|
From: Arnaldo C. de M. <ac...@re...> - 2009-09-30 14:58:37
|
Em Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 02:04:18PM +0200, Ingo Molnar escreveu: > > * Masami Hiramatsu <mhi...@re...> wrote: > > > Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> These patches introduce perf kprobe command and update kprobe-tracer. > >> perf kprobe command allows you to add new probe points by C line number > >> and local variable names. > > > > Last week, Arnaldo and I talked about this command, and he suggested > > that the command would be better 'perf probe', because it would be > > able to cover both of kernel space (by kprobes) and user space (by > > uprobes). > > Agreed. > > > Basically, I agree with his idea. But I think we may need to consider > > more flexible syntax for that purpose before we support uprobes. In > > this area, SystemTap has done big advance, we can see how many > > varieties of syntax it has by 'man stapprobes'. > > > > And also, it's hard to decide it without real uprobe-tracer (and > > uprobes too!) implementation on ftrace. So, I think it is better to > > continue using 'perf kprobe' in this time. > > > > But it's worth to add to todo list. :) > > I'd still name it 'perf probe', even if initially it supports kprobes. Agreed. - Arnaldo |