lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Oct]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 5/5] tracing/ftrace: Introduce the big kernel lock tracer
Hi -

On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 10:47:36AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> [...]
> > > I would rather prefer to use an API that provides functions/objects
> > > for most common scripting languages.
> >
> > That is an interesting idea. One possible problem is that the final
> > complete script "program" needs to be translated to something that can
> > run quickly and safely inside the kernel. Full python or perl runtime
> > + libraries would have been almost certainly unbearable.
>
> Why can't the userspace application convert the script to something
> easy that the kernel can handle?

That's what we do with the systemtap script, where kernel "handling"
consists of "running the machine code".

> But have the user application interface be very simple, and perhaps
> even use perl or python.

perl and python are pretty big procedural languages, and are not
easily compiled down to compact & quickly executed machine code. (I
take it no one is suggesting including a perl or python VM in the
kernel.) Plus, debugger-flavoured event-handling programming style
would not look nearly as compact in perl/python as in systemtap, which
is small and domain-specific.

- FChE


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-10-24 17:05    [W:0.069 / U:0.192 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site