Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 18 Jan 2012 12:59:38 +0100 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [GIT PULL] tracing: make signal tracepoints more useful |
| |
* Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 01/17, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > Any tool that requests the signal trace event, and copies > > the full (and now larger) record it got in the ring-buffer, > > without expanding the target record's size accordingly will > > *BREAK*. > > > > I do not claim that tools will break in practice - i'm > > raising the *possibility* out of caution and i'm frustrated > > that you *STILL* don't understand how ABIs are maintained in > > Linux. > > OK, but what if we rename the tracepoint? > > IOW, add the new tracepoint and remove the old one. Of course, > this can confuse the users of the current "signal_generate", > but this is safe. b413d48a does this... > > Or this is not allowed too?
Everything is allowed that makes sense and does not break apps, with a strong preference towards the simplest possible variant.
I.e. your patch.
Thanks,
Ingo
| |