4 ms·
New Linux tracing tool: "trace"
- andrewcooke 16y agoAnyone know how this compares to oprofile? At first glance it looks very similar. http://oprofile.sourceforge.net/news/ http://oprofile.sourceforge.net/news/ [Also, related, why do people still introduce new tools that have generic, and therefore un-searchable names? Google is useless for "oprofile trace difference"...]
- garply 16y agoI don't think these naming conventions are problematic. Generic and useful tools should be named with simple, generic names. This is Google's problem, or a problem of the programmer using the wrong methods to search for the tool.
- wingo 16y agoThe better comparison is to strace. LWN has good comments on the topic: http://lwn.net/Articles/415728/#Comments http://lwn.net/Articles/415728/#Comments.
- ekidd 16y agoIt looks like oprofile takes an approach similar to gprof: It tries to show you how much time is spent in each function. The new trace command, on the other hand, traces kernel events: page faults, system calls, fork/exec commands, and so on. Obviously, there's some overlap between the two activities (particularly as both tools mature), but for now, it looks like the 'trace' command records rather different data than oprofile. Of course, I don't know anything about oprofile beyond what's on their introductory web pages, so maybe I'm overlooking something.
- andrewcooke 16y agoAh, thanks - looks like I misunderstood what it was doing.
- jedbrown 16y agoOprofile has been essentially replaced by "perf" (https://perf.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Main_Page https://perf.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Main_Page) which should offer a superset of oprofile's capability with a nicer interface. This new "trace" looks like it more about system calls, and perhaps has some overlap with perf (and uses perf).