lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Mar]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [RFC][PATCH 1/2] tracing/ftrace: syscall tracing infrastructure


    On Mon, 9 Mar 2009, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:

    > On Mon, Mar 09, 2009 at 09:52:20AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
    > >
    > > On Sat, 7 Mar 2009, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
    > > > +
    > > > +
    > > > +static atomic_t refcount;
    > > > +
    > > > +enum print_line_t
    > > > +print_syscall_enter(struct trace_iterator *iter, int flags)
    > > > +{
    > > > + struct trace_seq *s = &iter->seq;
    > > > + struct trace_entry *ent = iter->ent;
    > > > + struct syscall_trace_enter *trace;
    > > > + enum syscall_trace_nr syscall;
    > > > + const struct syscall_trace_entry *entry;
    > > > + char *str = NULL;
    > > > + int i, ret;
    > > > +
    > > > + trace_assign_type(trace, ent);
    > > > +
    > > > + syscall = trace->nr;
    > > > +
    > > > + if (!syscall || syscall >= __SYSCALL_TRACE_END)
    > >
    > > You still need to print a "\n" otherwise the output of the next line
    > > will start on the current line.
    >
    > Are you sure?
    > This entry will be ignored. And the previous one did print a newline.
    > So the next one should not have any problem.

    Does this take over the printline? Otherwise we could be printing a
    header, (comm, timestamp, cpu, etc).

    -- Steve


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2009-03-10 01:55    [W:4.028 / U:15.760 seconds]
    ©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site