Cc: Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@...>, Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@...>, John Reiser <jreiser@...>, Pekka Enberg <penberg@...>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...>, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...>, Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...>, Christoph Lameter <clameter@...>, Daniel Walker <dwalker@...>, Andi Kleen <andi@...>, Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...>, Josh Aune <luken@...>, Pekka Paalanen <pq@...>
On Sat, May 10, 2008 at 06:17:21PM +0100, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
It can be done either way. Grinding userspace code as well is more
uniform, as there's no need to say "this clone should not be followed,
as it will become a UML process". On the other hand, not grinding
processes means you don't need to figure out how to get the valgrind
engine into your processes.
Jeff
--
Work email - jdike at linux dot intel dot com
--
