From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23383 invoked by alias); 3 Jul 2008 01:50:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 23374 invoked by uid 22791); 3 Jul 2008 01:50:57 -0000 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_SOFTFAIL X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from www.church-of-our-saviour.org (HELO thunker.thunk.org) (69.25.196.31) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Thu, 03 Jul 2008 01:50:40 +0000 Received: from root (helo=closure.thunk.org) by thunker.thunk.org with local-esmtp (Exim 4.50 #1 (Debian)) id 1KEDxU-00085V-68; Wed, 02 Jul 2008 21:50:04 -0400 Received: from tytso by closure.thunk.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1KEDxT-0006eK-JP; Wed, 02 Jul 2008 21:50:03 -0400 Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2008 01:50:00 -0000 From: Theodore Tso To: "H. Peter Anvin" Cc: Ulrich Drepper , ksummit-2008-discuss@lists.linux-foundation.org, Stephen Hemminger , Roland McGrath , systemtap@sources.redhat.com Bcc: tytso@mit.edu Subject: Re: [Ksummit-2008-discuss] Potential Systemtap topics for the Kernel Summit Message-ID: <20080703015003.GD23574@mit.edu> References: <20080701024140.GB28143@mit.edu> <20080701070746.C6DAD15420E@magilla.localdomain> <20080701101507.GB22717@mit.edu> <20080701200632.6790A1541F5@magilla.localdomain> <20080701231327.GA5829@mit.edu> <20080702192519.GA31206@redhat.com> <20080702213938.GA23574@mit.edu> <20080702155357.6e258347@extreme> <486C20CA.4010503@redhat.com> <486C2504.6050608@zytor.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <486C2504.6050608@zytor.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17+20080114 (2008-01-14) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: tytso@mit.edu X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on thunker.thunk.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Mailing-List: contact systemtap-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: systemtap-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2008-q3/txt/msg00030.txt.bz2 On Wed, Jul 02, 2008 at 06:01:56PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > They wouldn't even have to be embedded in the C code directly (unless > that makes them easier to write by being in situ), but even just having > them as separate files in the kernel tarball should make keeping them in > sync easier. Sure, as long as we have some automated way to make sure the tapsets aren't broken. But that should be relatively easy --- just have a Makefile rule that collects all of the tapsets and runs them through stap. - Ted