-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5.9k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Correct EventPipe comparison info #42456
Conversation
The EventPipe docs were saying things about LTTng that were either incorrect or misleading. I think changing the comparison to use perf_events makes it more effective. - LTTng does support tracing kernel events, but as written users are likely to get the wrong idea. Perfcollect, the tool we recommend to when using LTTng with .NET, uses perf_events rather than LTTng to perform the kernel tracing. Perfcollect only uses lttng for its user-mode tracing capability. - LTTng doesn't support native callstacks as far as I am aware.
PTAL @brianrob @dotnet/dotnet-diag |
fyi @Maoni0 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
thanks for fixing this!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM- thanks!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This LGTM as well. I'll now.
I see this is already merged, but thanks for including me and thanks for fixing @noahfalk! |
The EventPipe docs were saying things about LTTng that were either incorrect or misleading. I think changing the comparison to use perf_events makes it more effective.
Internal previews