[ltt-dev] [RFC UST] Processes model
david.goulet at polymtl.ca
Tue Jan 18 12:32:36 EST 2011
On 11-01-18 06:15 AM, Nils Carlson wrote:
> Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
>> On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 9:13 PM, David Goulet
>> <david.goulet at polymtl.ca> wrote:
>>> I'm submitting a RFC about a "new daemon model" for UST.
>>> This is the *first* draft... so a lot of feedback will be appreciated
>>> improvements and ideas!
>> At first glance I'm concerned about a root ustd daemon. One of the
>> things I like about LTTng UST is that it's low on administration
>> overhead and configuration. Putting a central service in place that
>> mediates access introduces a level of complexity that makes it harder
>> for unprivileged users who want to quickly trace something in an app
>> they are running or developing.
> The central daemon is already in place. I assume your talking about
> using the usttrace command?
>> Perhaps offer a two-level approach:
>> 1. You can directly trace processes that you have permissions for. No
>> root and no system-wide daemon needed.
>> 2. You can set up a system-wide daemon and get all the access control,
>> tracing over the network, etc benefits.
> I think this is a good goal... ad-hoc is important for debugging.
The last use case I put in the RFC was for "ad-hoc" tracing. No
privilege needed, only the apps and a consumer so tracing can go on.
But you are right, UST has to be able to trace without any root
privileges. I will make that clearer in the next version of the document.
>> I will reread the RFC in more detail later in case I've missed the
>> answers to this.
>> ltt-dev mailing list
>> ltt-dev at lists.casi.polymtl.ca
LTTng project, DORSAL Lab.
PGP/GPG : 1024D/16BD8563
BE3C 672B 9331 9796 291A 14C6 4AF7 C14B 16BD 8563
More information about the lttng-dev