This is the mail archive of the systemtap@sourceware.org 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] |
Martin J. Bligh wrote:
Why don't we just copy the whole damned function somewhere else, and make an instrumented copy (as a kernel module)?
If you're going to go with that, then why not just use a comment-based
markup?
Then your alternate copy gets to be generated from the same codebase.
It also solves the inherent problem of decided on whether a macro-based markup is far too intrusive, since you can mildly allow yourself more verbosity in a comment. Not only that, but if it's comment-based, it's even forseable, though maybe not desirable, than *everything* that deals with this type of markup be maintained out of tree (i.e. scripts generating alternate functions and all.)
Not sure we need scripts, just a normal patch diff would do. I'm not sure any of this alters the markup debate much ... it just would seem to provide a simpler, faster, and more flexible way of hooking in than kprobes.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |