[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150122132734.GB2473@krava.brq.redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 14:27:35 +0100
From: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
To: Wang Nan <wangnan0@...wei.com>
Cc: rostedt@...dmis.org, jeremie.galarneau@...icios.com,
bigeasy@...utronix.de, lizefan@...wei.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 2/2] perf: convert: fix duplicate field names and
avoid reserved keywords.
On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 01:36:43PM +0800, Wang Nan wrote:
> (If Steven Rostedt accept the previous patch which introduce a priv
> field to 'struct format_field', we can use a relative simple method
> for name conversion. If not , perf must track name conversion by
> itself.)
>
> Some parameters of syscall tracepoints named as 'nr', 'event', etc.
> When dealing with them, perf convert to ctf meets some problem:
>
> 1. If a parameter with name 'nr', it will duplicate syscall's
> common field 'nr'. One such syscall is io_submit().
>
> 2. If a parameter with name 'event', it is denied to be inserted
> because 'event' is a babeltrace keywork. One such syscall is
> epoll_ctl.
>
> This patch appends '_dupl_X' suffix to avoid problem 1, prepend a '_'
> prefix to avoid problem 2.
I've got compilation error:
util/data-convert-bt.c: In function ‘event_class_add_field’:
util/data-convert-bt.c:629:2: error: suggest parentheses around assignment used as truth value [-Werror=parentheses]
while (t = bt_ctf_event_class_get_field_by_name(event_class, name)) {
what's your gcc version? mine's caught that..
[jolsa@...va perf]$ gcc --version
gcc (GCC) 4.8.3 20140911 (Red Hat 4.8.3-7)
SNIP
>
> +/* If dup < 0, add a prefix. Else, add _dupl_X suffix. */
> +static char *change_name(char *name, char *orig_name, int dup)
> +{
> + char *new_name = NULL;
> + size_t len;
> +
> + if (!name)
> + name = orig_name;
> +
> + if (dup >= 10)
> + goto out;
> +
> + if (dup < 0)
> + len = strlen(name) + sizeof("_");
> + else
> + len = strlen(orig_name) + sizeof("_dupl_X");
if we allow for _dupl_10, should we use 'sizeof("_dupl_x")' ^^^ in here?
> +
> + new_name = malloc(len);
> + if (!new_name)
> + goto out;
> +
> + if (dup < 0)
> + snprintf(new_name, len, "_%s", name);
> + else
> + snprintf(new_name, len, "%s_dupl_%d", orig_name, dup);
> +
> +out:
> + if (name != orig_name)
> + free(name);
> + return new_name;
SNIP
> +
> + name = field->name;
> + while (t = bt_ctf_event_class_get_field_by_name(event_class, name)) {
> + bt_ctf_field_type_put(t);
> + name = change_name(name, field->name, dup++);
> + if (!name) {
> + pr_err("Failed to create dup name for '%s'\n", field->name);
> + return -1;
> + }
> + }
> +
> + ret = bt_ctf_event_class_add_field(event_class, type, name);
> +
> + /* if failed, we may hit a keywork. try again with a '_' prefix */
> + if (ret) {
> + name = change_name(name, field->name, -1);
> + if (!name) {
> + pr_err("Failed to alloc name for '_%s'\n", field->name);
> + return -1;
> + }
> + ret = bt_ctf_event_class_add_field(event_class, type, name);
so there's no other way on checking up with the blacklist right?
thanks,
jirka
--
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