lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Jul]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH -tip -v10 7/7] tracing: add kprobe-based event tracer
On Tue, Jul 07, 2009 at 04:42:32PM -0400, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 07, 2009 at 03:55:28PM -0400, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> >> Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> >>>> diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace.h b/kernel/trace/trace.h
> >>>> index 206cb7d..65945eb 100644
> >>>> --- a/kernel/trace/trace.h
> >>>> +++ b/kernel/trace/trace.h
> >>>> @@ -45,6 +45,8 @@ enum trace_type {
> >>>> TRACE_POWER,
> >>>> TRACE_BLK,
> >>>> TRACE_KSYM,
> >>>> + TRACE_KPROBE,
> >>>> + TRACE_KRETPROBE,
> >>>>
> >>>> __TRACE_LAST_TYPE,
> >>>> };
> >>>> @@ -227,6 +229,22 @@ struct trace_ksym {
> >>>> char ksym_name[KSYM_NAME_LEN];
> >>>> char p_name[TASK_COMM_LEN];
> >>>> };
> >>>> +#define TRACE_KPROBE_ARGS 6
> >>>> +
> >>>> +struct kprobe_trace_entry {
> >>>> + struct trace_entry ent;
> >>>> + unsigned long ip;
> >>>> + int nargs;
> >>>> + unsigned long args[TRACE_KPROBE_ARGS];
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I see that you actually make use of arg as a dynamic sizeable
> >>> array.
> >>> For clarity, args[TRACE_KPROBE_ARGS] could be args[0].
> >>>
> >>> It's just a neat and wouldn't affect the code nor the data
> >>> but would be clearer for readers of that code.
> >> Hmm. In that case, I think we'll need a new macro for field
> >> definition, like TRACE_FIELD_ZERO(type, item).
> >
> >
> >
> > You mean that for trace_define_field() to describe fields of events?
> > Actually the fields should be defined dynamically depending on how
> > is built the kprobe event (which arguments are requested, how many,
> > etc..).
>
> Yeah, if you specified a probe point with its event name, the tracer
> will make a corresponding event dynamically. There are also anonymous
> probes which don't have corresponding events. For those anonymous
> probes, I need to define two generic event types(kprobe and kretprobe).
>
> Thank you,


Ok. Btw, why do you need to define those two anonymous events?
Actually your event types are always dynamically created.
Those you defined through TRACE_FORMAT_EVENT are only "ghost events",
they only stand there as a abstract pattern, right?



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-07-07 23:01    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site