On Fri, 24 Mar 2023 09:43:53 -0700 Beau Belgrave <beaub@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > It was actually merged in 5.8. So sysctl should be sufficient with that. > > But maybe it's weird to start adding sysctls, when the rest of tracing > > tunables is AFAIK under /sys/kernel/tracing/ ? > > > > During the TraceFS meetings Steven runs I was asked to add a boot > parameter and sysctl for user_events to limit the max. > > To me, it seems when user_events moves toward namespace awareness > sysctl might be easier to use from within a namespace to turn knobs. > > Happy to change to whatever, but I want to see Steven and Masami agree > on the approach before doing so. > > Steven, do you agree with Masami to move to just sysctl? We do have some tracing related sysctls already: # cd /proc/sys/kernel # ls *trace* ftrace_dump_on_oops oops_all_cpu_backtrace traceoff_on_warning ftrace_enabled stack_tracer_enabled tracepoint_printk Although I would love to deprecated ftrace_enable as that now has a control in tracefs, but it's not unprecedented to have tracing tunables as sysctl. And if we get cmdline boot parameters for free from sysctls then all the better. -- Steve
