Re: [RFC] tracefs [LWN.net]

From:		Greg KH <greg-AT-kroah.com>
To:		Ingo Molnar <mingo-AT-elte.hu>
Subject:		Re: [RFC] tracefs
Date:		Tue, 27 Oct 2009 18:06:47 -0700
Cc:		Steven Rostedt <rostedt-AT-goodmis.org>, Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec-AT-gmail.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo-AT-redhat.com>, linux-kernel-AT-vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx-AT-linutronix.de>, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra-AT-chello.nl>
Archive-link:		Article, Thread

On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 07:32:37AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> * Greg KH <greg@kroah.com> wrote:
> 
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > At LinuxCon this year, Steven and I talked about moving the debugfs 
> > usage in the tracing core to a stand-alone filesystem to give the 
> > ability to start to lock down the api so that people an count on what 
> > is going on in the tracing userspace interface.
> 
> What we want to move out initially (and i talked to Steve and Frederic 
> about that a few weeks ago) is the event description bits - the format 
> stuff in /debug/tracing/events/ - but definitely not all the other, 
> rather messy and ad-hoc APIs.
> 
> _No way_ do we want to tie down the pretty-printing ftrace details as an 
> ABI. We promised that when ftrace went upstream and all the details are 
> way too messy to be exposed in an ABI alike matter (and yes, consider 
> this a NAK Steve ;-).

Ok, I'll drop this.  There was some cleanups I found, I'll pick those
out and send them on.  What tree should I base off of to send cleanup
patches to?

thanks,

greg k-h

(Log in to post comments)