[Bug runtime/3858] Independent Runtime Module

["hiramatu at sdl dot hitachi dot co dot jp" <sourceware-bugzilla at sourceware dot org>]

------- Additional Comments From hiramatu at sdl dot hitachi dot co dot jp  2007-02-16 13:06 -------
(In reply to comment #9)
> > In many cases, IMHO, the gcc/kernel-debuginfo is not installed on the customer's
> > servers because of security and diskspace. So, we can't compile the scripts
> > on those servers.
> 
> This situation is already addressed to some extent with our cross-compilation
> capabilities.  (See the relevant war story wiki page for an example.)

Sure. I thank you for this useful feature.
Unfortunately, even if stap have the cross-compilation capabilities,
our customers might not allow to install those cross-compiled 
script from the laptop. I worry about this situation.

> > I'd like to share only buffers, not variables.
> > I think the sharing buffer interfaces will not increase contention
> > slowdown. What would you think about this?
> 
> Unless I am mistaken, sharing buffers by nature increases contention.
> Concurrently executing probes would have to use some mutual exclusion
> to write into the same buffer.

As far as I know, the systemtap's runtime has small per-cpu buffers for 
buffering output before writing it to relay sub-buffers. There is no
mutual exclusion. You can check it at runtime/print.c.

>  Plus they would probably have to include
> some additional information with every record to identify the script
> that produced it.

Hmm, I just need this feature for integrating trace data which will be
recorded by a common format, for instance LKET. In this case, I think 
we don't need to identify which script has recorded each recorded entry.

For example, I'll attach the patch which implements minimum requirement
of this feature. Please read it.

> > I think we might as well focus on the "I/O buffer sharing by pre-compiled
> > modules" issue. The title of this bug is very confusion, so I suggest that 
> > we should make a new entry to discuss this issue.
> 
> Perhaps we can lump it in with the flight recorder functionality.

I'm not sure. How would you do it?



-- 


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3858

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.