> So it looks like what you folks are doing is actually very similar to what > Facebook is doing. That is interesting, and explains why some GNOME > developers are jumping on the bandwagon of this Change proposal. To be fair, we've been complaining about it internally in GNOME for probably around a decade. So it's not a new thing from our standpoint. What is new is that it appears others came to the similar-in-spirit solutions. There are certainly places where it falls down still. Things like libffi, libc, encryption, hand-rolled assembler, etc as you mention. But since we still capture those stack traces as counting against the proper pid, it's often enough to allow you to dive deeper or see collateral damage. You might need to sort your callgraph a bit differently, but it's certainly possible in sysprof given the flexibility of the callgraph display. > Does profiling individual applications file under "profiling by intuition" > for you? Because that is what I would expect developers to go back to if > systemwide profiling stops being viable. I would say yes because you have to be intuitive about which application(s) or libraries matter. When sysprof is working correctly, you can click record and have a decent understanding of where things are going wrong. That's a tough thing to replicate in a handful of terminals simultaneously displaying information which likely exacerbate desktop workloads on their own. > And is it such a problem to require the handful developers who need to do > systemwide profiling to do that, instead of slowing down the production > installation for all users? I think our goal should be to make it so easy that it's not just a handful of people doing system-wide profiling like it is today. Using sysprof (or similar tool) as the first step in triage makes a lot of sense to me because it gives upstream a way to capture correlating information and visualize it in a useful manner. Despite being the author of the modern incarnation of Sysprof, I'm not against using pretty much anything else that works. But here we are at an existential choice of what Fedora is. Are we for developers creating the platform(s)? Are we an optimized end-user distribution? If so where do the developers go that need to build these systems? Because it's clear to me that the status quo is often getting in the way for some of us. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
