Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Wed, 11 Apr 2012 22:42:25 +0530 | | From | Srikar Dronamraju <> | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] perf/probe: Provide perf interface for uprobes |
| |
* Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@infradead.org> [2012-04-11 11:49:18]:
> Em Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 07:27:42PM +0530, Srikar Dronamraju escreveu: > > From: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > > > - Enhances perf to probe user space executables and libraries. > > - Enhances -F/--funcs option of "perf probe" to list possible probe points in > > an executable file or library. > > - Documents userspace probing support in perf. > > > > [ Probing a function in the executable using function name ] > > perf probe -x /bin/zsh zfree > > > > [ Probing a library function using function name ] > > perf probe -x /lib64/libc.so.6 malloc > > > > [ list probe-able functions in an executable ] > > perf probe -F -x /bin/zsh > > > > [ list probe-able functions in an library] > > perf probe -F -x /lib/libc.so.6 > > Can we avoid the need for -x? I.e. we could figure out it is userspace > and act accordingly. >
To list the functions in the module ipv6, we use "perf probe -F -m ipv6" So I used the same logic to use -x for specifying executables.
This is in agreement with probepoint addition where without any additional options would mean kernel probepoint; m option would mean module and x option would mean user space executable.
However if you still think we should change, do let me know.
-- Thanks and Regards Srikar
|  |