Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2008 15:09:39 +0200 (CEST) From: Juergen Lock <nox@jelal.kn-bremen.de> To: lme@FreeBSD.org Cc: Roman Divacky <rdivacky@FreeBSD.org>, jb@FreeBSD.org, John Birrell <jb@what-creek.com>, current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: dtrace status Message-ID: <200809211309.m8LD9dNl065209@saturn.kn-bremen.de> In-Reply-To: <20080919114528.5yzyki2ry8044g4s@0x20.net> References: <20080917101013.GA90749@freebsd.org> <20080918211652.GB19958@what-creek.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In article <20080919114528.5yzyki2ry8044g4s@0x20.net> you write: >Quoting John Birrell <jb@what-creek.com>: > >> On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 12:10:13PM +0200, Roman Divacky wrote: >>> Dtrace was commited 3 months ago and the only things that prevents >>> using it "out of the box" is building kernel with WITH_CTF=1. >>> >>> When is this going to be enabled on default. What is preventing this >>> from happening? >> >> I wonder whether people generally want it enabled by default. > >If it doesn't slow anything down, then why not? > At least on 7-stable (I didn't try HEAD) kgdb doesn't seem to like dtrace bits in the kernel, backtraces look like from a kernel without debug symbols... Also there seem to be issues with fbt probes, http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/2008-September/045180.html and SMP support at least on amd64, http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/2008-September/045093.html >Are there any FreeBSD specific docs on this? Maybe a short article for >/usr/share/doc or a new chapter for the handbook? :-) I dunno about FreeBSD specific, but I liked this presentation: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8002801113289007228&ei=XLPNSMv5KpKw2QKysZzBAg&q=dtrace (video is called Dtrace Review if you need to search it.) Thanx, Juergen
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200809211309.m8LD9dNl065209>