* Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > But face it, you can argue until you're blue in the face, That is not a technical argument though - and i considered and answered every valid technical argument made by you and Thomas. You were either not able to or not willing to counter them. > [...] but both tglx and I will NAK any and all patches that extend > perf/ftrace beyond the passive observing role. The thing is, perf is *already* well beyond the 'passive observer' role: we already generate lots of 'action' in response to events. We generate notification signals, we write events - all of which can (and does) modify program behavior. So what's your point? There's no "passive observer" role really - it's apparently just that you dislike this use of instrumentation while you approve of other uses. Thanks, Ingo
