[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2013 20:10:02 -0500
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...stprotocols.net>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung.kim@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/14] tools lib traceevent: Get rid of malloc_or_die()
in show_error()
On Wed, 11 Dec 2013 11:29:21 +0900
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 20:55:26 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > On Wed, 11 Dec 2013 09:40:35 +0900
> > Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org> wrote:
> >> And should we extend the error code to include the return value of
> >> pevent_filter_match() too? If not, it seems we need to pass another
> >> argument to receive the actual error code in case of FILTER_ERROR.
> >
> > I'm a bit confused on this. Perhaps it's something you added in your
> > patches. If what returns FILTER_ERROR?
>
> Well, I mean there are some cases which return FILTER_ERROR. With my
> patch, test_filter() can failed with the error_str set like following:
>
> - invalid expression type
> - must have number field
> - invalid numeric argument type
> - invalid numeric comparison type
> - invalid string comparison type
> - invalid operator type
> - invalid argument type
>
> To distinguish them, we either need to extend return value or another
> argument. But the current return value of pevent_filter_match() was
> defined as FILTER_{MATCH,MISS,NOEXIST,NONE,ERROR}.
>
> And also I want all user APIs share same return value/type as
> pevent_errno so that user can pass it our strerror function to see the
> error message.
>
> So to use return value, we need to extend the error code to include all
> possible error cases above as well as normal cases (MATCH, MISS, ...).
Sure, lets add them to the list of pevent errnos.
>
> >
> >>
> >> I'm saying these here since they might require interface/signature
> >> change so will affect existing users like trace-cmd.
> >
> > I'm OK if they change now. I'll have trace-cmd and other users adapt.
> > As each currently has their own copy. I've been updating trace-cmd with
> > what's in tools for a while now, and plan to continue doing that until
> > we have something that seems good for a public library.
>
> Okay, I'll cook the patch soon!
>
My only concern with the libtraceevent API is that it still maintains
all the features that it currently has.
-- Steve
--
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