From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: michel.dagenais@polymtl.ca (Michel Dagenais) Date: Tue, 07 Sep 2010 09:24:05 -0400 Subject: [ltt-dev] UST socket protocol In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4C863CF5.5050705@polymtl.ca> > I've been looking through the socket protocol for UST and am a bit > curious about the construction of it. Is there a reason we haven't just > defined a ustctl package type with a command field, a result field and a > data field? > > This would reduce the amount of scanning required by quite a bit. I have not looked closely at the protocol. Reusing an existing protocol would make sense. For instance, reusing the GDB protocol could be interesting since GDB is already capable of listing and activating UST tracepoints. Moreover, the GDB protocol is also used by kgdb to enable kernel dynamic tracepoints with kprobes with a recent patch. I doubt that the GDB protocol would be optimized for fast transfers of tracing data, but that may be transmitted through a separate channel. The TCF protocol could be another candidate.