lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Sep]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [Patch] Tracing/ftrace: Adds a marker to allow user comments
Steven,

is there a logic behind trace_seq_print_cont() printing the terminating
newline only, when there actually is no TRACE_CONT entry?

Hmm, wait a minute, I don't understand how this thing works at all.

Let's take for instance print_lat_fmt() which is the first user of
trace_seq_print_cont(). Now, print_lat_fmt() does

struct trace_entry *entry = iter->ent;

and uses 'entry'. Let's assume it is of type TRACE_PRINT. It does

case TRACE_PRINT:
seq_print_ip_sym(s, field->print.ip, sym_flags);
trace_seq_printf(s, ": %s", field->print.buf);
if (field->flags & TRACE_FLAG_CONT)
trace_seq_print_cont(s, iter);
break;
Ok, it prints the beginning of the message, and if there should be
continuation blocks, it calls trace_seq_print_cont(), defined as
follows:

static void
trace_seq_print_cont(struct trace_seq *s, struct trace_iterator *iter)
{
struct trace_array *tr = iter->tr;
struct trace_array_cpu *data = tr->data[iter->cpu];
struct trace_entry *ent;
ent = trace_entry_idx(tr, data, iter, iter->cpu);
if (!ent || ent->type != TRACE_CONT) {
trace_seq_putc(s, '\n');
return;
}
do {
trace_seq_printf(s, "%s", ent->cont.buf);
__trace_iterator_increment(iter, iter->cpu);
ent = trace_entry_idx(tr, data, iter, iter->cpu);
} while (ent && ent->type == TRACE_CONT);
}
Here it uses trace_entry_idx() to get 'ent'. What's the difference to
iter->ent? I don't understand how trace_entry_idx() works, but looking
at how it is used, it must return the pointer to the *next* entry in
the ring buffer. So I don't understand the name of the function, and I
don't see a call to __trace_iterator_increment(), which is confusing.

If contrary to the assumption, 'ent' is not a continuation, it prints
the terminating newline. This is an exceptional case, as the original
entry was marked as having continuation entries.

The normal case then is to execute the do-while, until it hits a
non-continuation entry. Here it does *not* print the terminating newline.

Steven, could you explain what is going on here?


Thanks.



On Thu, 4 Sep 2008 20:30:58 +0300
Pekka Paalanen <pq@iki.fi> wrote:

> b) have a customisable trace_seq_print_cont()
>
> I think I'd favour b). When I tried to use trace_seq_print_cont(),
> I found it difficult to control the printing of \n at the end of
> message. So I would implement my own routine to handle also what
> trace_seq_print_cont() does, filtering the text while copying it
> to struct trace_seq. I'm not sure where this function should live.
> It could be useful to all tracers, that want "one line per marker
> entry" style output, so it could live in trace.c.

--
Pekka Paalanen
http://www.iki.fi/pq/


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-09-07 16:15    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site