Matthew Allum <mallum openedhand com> writes:
> But I think the difference here is, and a point you've very well made,
> is sysprof is designed for desktop type hardware - thats not (usually)
> ARM. On ARM we *need* features that oprofile gives us like use of
> hardware foo to lower overhead and the data collection separation.
> Porting sysprof to ARM as to be useful would likely break your original
> design goals.
I wouldn't say that sysprof is designed for desktop type _hardware_,
as much as it is designed for desktop developers. After all, an ARM of
today is as powerful as a desktop not that many years ago, and sysprof
actually goes to quite some length to limit the amount of CPU and
memory it uses.