Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Tue, 20 Apr 2021 09:29:27 -0400 (EDT)
From:   Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
To:     rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc:     Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
        fweisbec <fweisbec@gmail.com>, Jessica Yu <jeyu@kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, chris@chris-wilson.co.uk,
        yuanhan liu <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>,
        "Grumbach, Emmanuel" <emmanuel.grumbach@intel.com>
Message-ID: <1154727029.2004.1618925367044.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com>
In-Reply-To: <20210420085532.4062b15e@gandalf.local.home>
References: <1299622684.20306.77.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> <20130813111442.632f3421@gandalf.local.home> <87siybk8yl.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> <20130814233228.778f25d0@gandalf.local.home> <77a6e40b57df092d1bd8967305906a210f286111.camel@intel.com> <20210419181111.5eb582e8@gandalf.local.home> <CAPcyv4gw7KoL8U66LLx_DVAE+5Jguz7tb3Rax-bdTz4BrpwhvQ@mail.gmail.com> <20210420085532.4062b15e@gandalf.local.home>
Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFC] tracing: Enable tracepoints via module parameters
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Thread-Topic: tracing: Enable tracepoints via module parameters
Thread-Index: sM+iKvNdasbLkp1rglxClIfh9BgdaA==
Precedence: bulk

----- On Apr 20, 2021, at 8:55 AM, rostedt rostedt@goodmis.org wrote:
[...]
> 
> Would adding automatic module parameters be an issue? That is, you can add
> in the insmod command line a parameter that will enable tracepoints. We
> could have a way to even see them from the modinfo. I think I had that
> working once, and it wasn't really that hard to do.

There is one thing we should consider here in terms of namespacing: those module
command line parameters should be specific to each tracer (e.g. ftrace, perf, ebpf).

LTTng for instance already tackles early module load tracing in a different
way: users can enable instrumentation of yet-to-be loaded kernel modules. So
it would not make sense in that scheme to have module load parameters.

It's a different trade-off in terms of error reporting though: for instance,
LTTng won't report an error if a user does a typo when entering an event name.

So I think those command line parameters should be tracer-specific, do you agree ?

Thanks,

Mathieu

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com