Re: problems with lttng-0.5.1/ltt-control-0.5/linux-2.6.14.1

* Martin Robb ([email protected]) wrote:
> Mathieu, Parissa,
> 
> Thanks for the help. We are just transitioning from a 2.6.9 to a 2.6.18 
> kernel, so I'm thinking it would be better for me in the long run to 
> just move to a 2.6.18-based lttng, or else to the most recent stable 
> version. Any advice on whether one would be significantly better than 
> the other?
> 

I would either go with the latest 2.6.18 LTTng or try to backport the
latest 2.6.21-rc mm LTTng. Note that you must follow the instructions I
pointed to Deepak in a previous email to get all the bits needed for the
backport : some are in the mm patches (markers, atomic ops, local atomic
ops), some are in the LTTng patches. You will also have to backport
debugfs and relay, since I submitted patches to these systems that are
required for LTTng to work flawlessly.

Regards,

Mathieu

> Thanks,
> Marty
> 
> Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> >Good point. The quickstart guide is not adapted to these old versions.
> >He should get the quickstart from the older LTTV packages instead of
> >fetching it from the website.
> >
> >Mathieu
> >
> >* Parissa Heidari ([email protected]) wrote:
> >  
> >>Hi Mathieu,
> >>
> >>This is an old version, I think it was using Relayfs instead of debugfs. 
> >>Regarding: 
> >>    
> >>>Reading from relayfs directory : /media/debugfs/
> >>>      
> >>Could Relayfs cause the problem? 
> >>
> >>Parissa. 
> >>    
> 

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
Computer Engineering Ph.D. Student, Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal
OpenPGP key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F  BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68