This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH,resubmit] Add static probes to runtime linker
Roland McGrath wrote:
> > FWIW, I think there is already sufficient capability for consumers
> > to adapt to changes. Here are some observations -- I wouldn't
> > really call them recommendations, since I think some of these
> > scenarios are best avoided if there are other alternatives:
>
> Right, those are pretty much the same observations that Gary made.
> So I think I can believe that we don't need any special
> future-proofing efforts beyond making best efforts to get the set
> of probes and their details right the first time.
Cool. Roland, would you like me to look into adding the extra
argument I mentioned in
http://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2012-07/msg00142.html, or
are you happy to leave that for future work.
Also, before I forget, Paul, last year when I was working on it you
had some concerns about in-process debuggers and other "self-aware"
binaries (you mentioned google-perftools). Are named probes a good
solution for you here?
Thanks,
Gary
--
http://gbenson.net/