Re: dtrace/systemtap options

2008-06-02 Thread olafBuddenhagen
Hi, On Fri, May 30, 2008 at 01:14:34AM -0400, Andrei Barbu wrote: > SystemTap itself doesn't get to sit in the Linux kernel. Linux exposes > an in-kernel API called kprobes. That allows you to do something like > (conceptually, not real code) set_entry_probe("some_function", myfun), > that will c

Re: dtrace/systemtap options

2008-05-29 Thread Andrei Barbu
> I don't get this: Why implement module loading just for this? Can't > SystemTap be just statically linked in gnumach? Or are the actual test > functions compiled and loaded as modules in SystemTap?... > SystemTap itself doesn't get to sit in the Linux kernel. Linux exposes an in-kernel API calle

Re: dtrace/systemtap options

2008-05-29 Thread olafBuddenhagen
Hi again, On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 04:20:12PM -0400, Andrei Barbu wrote: > 2 This one is ugly, and I'd rather not do it. It involves adding > module loading support to do the same thing that SystemTap does on > Linux. Compile code, add a prelude so that it becomes a regular > module, load it in an

Re: dtrace/systemtap options

2008-05-27 Thread Samuel Thibault
Hello, Andrei Barbu, le Mon 26 May 2008 17:57:04 -0400, a écrit : > On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 5:27 PM, Samuel Thibault > > BTW, I'm not sure to understand: what does RW means? Being able to > > tinker with kernel parameters? > > > > Yup, you could potentially do so in both dtrace and systemtap; >

Re: dtrace/systemtap options

2008-05-26 Thread olafBuddenhagen
Hi, On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 04:20:12PM -0400, Andrei Barbu wrote: > I've been thinking about all of the various ways to get either Dtrace > or SystemTap working. I've come up with 4 options: > [...] On the downside this is inherently R/O, although that does > increase security significantly. I

Re: dtrace/systemtap options

2008-05-26 Thread Andrei Barbu
On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 5:27 PM, Samuel Thibault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED], le Mon 26 May 2008 21:25:33 +0200, a écrit : >> Maybe you actually mean that RW increases the risk of crashing?... >> (Well, what fun would there be in system development, without the >> prospect of reg

Re: dtrace/systemtap options

2008-05-26 Thread Samuel Thibault
[EMAIL PROTECTED], le Mon 26 May 2008 21:25:33 +0200, a écrit : > Maybe you actually mean that RW increases the risk of crashing?... > (Well, what fun would there be in system development, without the > prospect of regular crashes? ;-) ) BTW, I'm not sure to understand: what does RW means? Being