Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Tue, 3 Mar 2020 18:24:58 -0500
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To:     Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Cc:     intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] trace: Export anonymous tracing
Message-ID: <20200303182458.1210c3bc@gandalf.local.home>
In-Reply-To: <158310134594.5508.5362429296192213548@skylake-alporthouse-com>
References: <20200301155248.4132645-1-chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
        <20200301131816.277dd398@oasis.local.home>
        <158310134594.5508.5362429296192213548@skylake-alporthouse-com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Sun, 01 Mar 2020 22:22:25 +0000
Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> wrote:

> Quoting Steven Rostedt (2020-03-01 18:18:16)
> > On Sun,  1 Mar 2020 15:52:47 +0000
> > Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> wrote:
> >   
> > > To facilitate construction of per-client event ringbuffers, in
> > > particular for a per-client debug and error report log, it would be
> > > extremely useful to create an anonymous file that can be handed to
> > > userspace so that it can see its and only its events. trace already
> > > provides a means of encapsulating the trace ringbuffer into a struct
> > > file that can be opened via the tracefs, and so with a couple of minor
> > > tweaks can provide the same access via an anonymous inode.  
> > 
> > I'm curious to why we need it to be anonymous. Why not allow them to be
> > visible from the tracing directory. This could allow for easier
> > debugging. Note, the trace instances have ref counters thus they can't
> > be removed if something has a reference to it.  
> 
> Do you really want a few thousand (or even tens) i915-client-%d? That
> does not particularly seem like it adds ease-of-use, and would need to be
> restricted to the client [or root]. The intent is for the client to have
> a private channel for detailed debug/error reporting of its own calls
> into the kernel.

Fair enough,

I would still want "trace_array_create()" to take a name. If it is NULL, it
becomes anonymous, but if you want it to appear in the tracing directory,
you can add a name to it.

Again, adding kernel doc comments to the global functions is still
necessary.

-- Steve