On Sat, 23 Feb 2008 12:37:24 +0100 Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> * Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Sysprof needs a 200 line kernel module to do it's work, this module > > > puts some simple profiling data into debugfs. > > > > > > ... > > > > Seems a poor idea to me. Sure, oprofile is "hard to set up", but not > > if your distributor already did it for you. > > two things. > > Firstly, this isnt an oprofile replacement, this is a pretty separate > concept. Sysprof is more of a tracer than a profiler. I don't understand the distinction and I don't see what sysprof (as defined by its kernel->userspace interface) can do which oprofile cannot. This is yet another thing which should have been in the damned changlog but wasn't. > (and we are > currently working on merging it into ftrace) I think you should drop it and we should see a replacement patch which has all the bugs, inefficiencies and deficiencies addressed and which has a vaguely respectable description. > Secondly, real developers who tune user-space code disagree with your > characterisation of oprofile being easy to use. afacit all of these criticisms surround oprofile's userspace tools only. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
