Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755368AbYFLPzo (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Jun 2008 11:55:44 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753410AbYFLPzf (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Jun 2008 11:55:35 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:33694 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753368AbYFLPze (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Jun 2008 11:55:34 -0400 Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 11:53:32 -0400 From: "Frank Ch. Eigler" To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Mathieu Desnoyers , Hideo AOKI , mingo@elte.hu, Masami Hiramatsu , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Steven Rostedt Subject: Re: Kernel marker has no performance impact on ia64. Message-ID: <20080612155332.GA16658@redhat.com> References: <48447052.3030300@redhat.com> <1212445965.6269.22.camel@lappy.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20080602232135.GA20173@Krystal> <1212618449.19205.35.camel@lappy.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20080604232241.GA8488@Krystal> <1212653539.19205.47.camel@lappy.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20080612135319.GB22348@Krystal> <1213280823.31518.114.camel@twins> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1213280823.31518.114.camel@twins> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2063 Lines: 44 Hi - On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 04:27:03PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > [...] > > Well, the string contains each field name and type. Therefore, SystemTAP > > can hook on a marker and parse the string looking for some elements by > > passing a NULL format string upon probe registration. Alternatively, it > > can provide the exact format string expected when it registers its probe > > to the marker and a check will be done to verify that the format string > > passed along with the registered probe matches the marker format string. > > Yes, I get that, its one of the ugliest things I've met in this whole > marker story. Why can't stap not insert a normal trace handler that > extracts the information from prev/next it wants? [...] Think this through. How should systemtap (or another user-space separate-compiled tool like lttng) do this exactly? (a) rely on debugging information? Even assuming we could get proper anchors (PC addresses or unambiguous type names) to start searching dwarf data, we lose a key attractions of markers: that it can robustly transfer data *without* dwarf data kept around. (b) rely on hand-written C code (prototypes, pointer derefrencing wrappers) distributed with systemtap? Not only would this be a brittle maintenance pain in the form of cude duplication, but then errors in it couldn't even be detected until the final C compilation stage. That would make a lousy user experience. (c) have systemtap try to parse the mhiramat-proposed "(struct task_struct * next, struct task_struct * prev)" format strings? Then we're asking systemtap to parse potentially general C type expressions, find the kernel headers that declare the types? Parse available subfields? That seems too much to ask for. (d) or another way? - FChE -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/