This is the mail archive of the systemtap@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the systemtap project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

RE: variables in scopes


One conclusion I'd draw from Richard and Vara's comments
is that tapset authors would commonly reference kernel
data structures and so would want familiar C syntax, but 
script authors would not, and in that context we might 
sacrifice the convenience of C for something with better 
safety properties. Vara, Richard, do you agreee/disagree?

Brad

-----Original Message-----
From: systemtap-owner@sources.redhat.com
[mailto:systemtap-owner@sources.redhat.com] On Behalf Of Richard J Moore
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2005 9:15 AM
To: Vara Prasad
Cc: Ulrich Drepper; Frank Ch. Eigler; Jim Keniston; SystemTAP
Subject: Re: variables in scopes





Vara Prasad wrote on 14/04/2005 14:57:32:


> I think if we go the route of full "C" syntax we will not be any where
> close to what Dtrace offers in the area of ease of use. The most value
i
> see in SystemTAP is knowledge of experts provided in the form of
> tapsets. The role of the language is an easy way to access those
tapsets
> and data they provide. Once we develop decent set of tapset libraries
> most people including kernel developers for most of the common tasks
> find what is available in the library sufficient.  There might be
> occasions where one needs more than what is available and if you are a
> kernel developer you can always edit generated code and add what you
> need and make the module. If you are an end user even if the language
> allows without considerable kernel knowledge you wont be able to
enhance
> the library anyway so it doesn't matter.
>
> I would like to point out that recently in a customer situation some
of
> the best Linux Kernel experts who have developed entire filesystems
and
> major parts of the vm area etc. were trying to solve a performance
> problem along side the Sun folks. Sun folks using the Dtrace were able
> to narrow down the problem literally in less than 30 minutes and
Linux
> Kernel  folks couldn't figure out even for days.  These guys are
Kernel
> experts, their main feedback to me was your Kprobe stuff is cool but
not
> very useful without library that exports the data and a simple
scripting
> language. I think we should not forget that language role is to make
it
> easy to get what we want out of kernel. If we make this as a full
blown
> c language, then i see where little difference in writing systemtap
> scripts vs kprobe modules.
>
> Just my 2 cents.
>
> bye,
> Vara Prasad
>


Agreed. If one wants the write probes in C then why use an interpretive
form of C?
Surely one would write kernel modules that would call the kprobes KPIs
directly.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]