Re: [RFC PATCH tip 4/5] use BPF in tracing filters

[Frank Ch. Eigler]

masami.hiramatsu.pt wrote:

> [...]
> Anyway, as far as I can see, there looks be two different models of
> tracing in our mind.
>
> A) Fixed event based tracing: In this model, there are several fixed
> "events" which well defined with fixed arguments. tracer handles these
> events and only use limited arguments. It's like a packet stream
> processing. ftrace, perf etc. are used this model.
>
> B) Flexible event-point tracing: In this model, each tracer(or even
> trace user) can freely define their own event, there will be some fixed
> tracing points defined, but arguments are defined by users. It's like a
> debugger's breakpoint debugging. systemtap, ktap etc. are used this model.

It may be more useful to think of it as a contrast along the
hard-coded versus programmable axis.  (perf, systemtap, and ktap can
each reach to some extent across your "fixed" vs "flexible" line.
Each has some dynamic and some static-tracepoint capability.)


> e.g. B model has a good flexibility and A model is easy to use for
> beginners.

I don't think it's the model that dictates ease-of-use, but the
quality of implementation, logistics, documentation, and examples.


- FChE
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/