[ltt-dev] [UST PATCH] Request: Make wait_for_buffer_consumption visible

[Paul Wögerer]

On 03/17/2011 03:45 PM, Nils Carlson wrote:
>> Yes, the main difference when passing through the ltt-sessiond daemon is
>> that your application would be two things:
>>
>> a) a trace data producer (hence it links with libust).
>> b) a trace controller (hence it links with the new liblttngctl)
>>
>> So the application can set the marker states, start/stop tracing, spawn
>> a consumer daemon, etc, but this is not done directly with a libust API:
>> it's done through the ltt-sessiond throught the liblttngctl API, as if
>> it was a normal "trace control" application.
>>
>
> Well, as libust can be run standalone I don't think there is any 
> reason to limit this to having to have lttng-tools installed.
>
> But this patch isn't actually about making a new libustctl command but 
> adding direct command access within libust.
>
> But I think we will need this, some applications will want to create 
> traces for internal use and going via the sessiond will add quite an 
> overhead.
>

Exactly, it shouldn't get any harder for users that just need libust alone.

Having wait_for_buffer_consumption() inside ustctl.h would allow us 
(Mentor) to use an official (unpatched) version of libust for our 
function/call tracing functionality.

For the future I would also like to support sessiond. Its there a git 
repository where I can try this new features out (its not on trunk yet 
-right ?) ?

--
TIA,
Paul