[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4B0F4F63.6040307@cn.fujitsu.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2009 12:02:43 +0800
From: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
CC: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Jason Baron <jbaron@...hat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] trace_syscalls: add missed field
Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 03:49:33PM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
>> Field syscall number is missed in syscall_enter_define_fields()/
>> syscall_exit_define_fields().
>>
>> syscall number is also needed for event filter or other users.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>
>
>
For all kinds of tracer, all fields are "defined"
by trace_define_field(), except this one.
Maybe because I don't like inconsistent codes.
>
> Well, I don't think it's very useful for in-kernel filtering.
> Filtering a syscall event by its number would mean filtering all
> event for this syscall. This is the same as not tracing it.
>
> Or do you have other usecases in mind?
>
Current, only filter use struct ftrace_event_call->fields,
so there is no other usecases ^_^.
But my next take of "tracing: use defined fields to print formats"
will use it.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists