From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20091110003356.GW19125@gradx.cs.jhu.edu> References: <55c52a87f0b8c0ac12a81a150f110b2b@brasstown.quanstro.net> <20091101184418.GM19125@gradx.cs.jhu.edu> <1257590719.28012.1344036163@webmail.messagingengine.com> <20091110003356.GW19125@gradx.cs.jhu.edu> Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 16:46:33 -0800 Message-ID: <13426df10911091646o305d2ab2g664aa719e5b9a0e9@mail.gmail.com> From: ron minnich To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [9fans] dtrace for plan 9 Topicbox-Message-UUID: 984a4ef0-ead5-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 4:33 PM, Nathaniel W Filardo wrote: > On Mon, Nov 09, 2009 at 12:07:22AM +0000, dave.l@mac.com wrote: >> =A0yet too dangerous due to its possible unbounded runtime > > I keep hearing this brought up, but (while I am not an expert) AFAICT, th= e > runtime for each D hook should be strictly bounded by the number of > instructions lobbed in, since D does not (without root override, perhaps?= ) > support backwards jumps. =A0Am I mistaken in my understanding of DTrace? You are right. I don't think runtime is unbounded. At the same time, I'm still trying to locate example scripts to get an idea of how complex it is. I'm talking to people at sun to get a handle on the question. ron