mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To: Mathieu Desnoyers <compudj@krystal.dyndns.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com>,
	Lai Jiangshan <laijs@cn.fujitsu.com>,
	Li Zefan <lizf@cn.fujitsu.com>,
	Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@redhat.com>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/10][RFC] tracing: Remove per event trace registering
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2010 16:14:37 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1272658477.9739.201.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100430200746.GA12872@Krystal>

On Fri, 2010-04-30 at 16:07 -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> * Steven Rostedt (rostedt@goodmis.org) wrote:
> > On Fri, 2010-04-30 at 15:06 -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> > 
> > > > If it is possible sure, but that's the point. Where do you add the
> > > > check? The typecast is in the C code that is constant for all trace
> > > > events.
> > > 
> > > You can add the call to the static inline type check directly within the
> > > generated probe function, right after the local variable declarations.
> > 
> > Well, one thing, the callback is not going to be the same as the
> > DECLARE_TRACE() because the prototype ends with "void *data", and the
> > function being called actually uses the type of that data.
> > 
> > We now will have:
> > 
> > 	DEFINE_TRACE(mytracepoint, int myarg, myarg);
> > 
> > 	void mycallback(int myarg, struct mystuct *mydata);
> > 
> > 	register_trace_mytracepoint_data(mycallback, mydata)
> > 
> > There's no place in DEFINE_TRACE to be able to test the type of data
> > that is being passed back. I could make the calling function be:
> > 
> > 	void mycallback(int myarg, void *data)
> > 	{
> > 		struct mystruct *mydata = data;
> > 	[...]
> > 
> > Because the data is defined uniquely by the caller that registers a
> > callback. Each function can register its own data type.
> 
> Yep. There would need to be a cast from void * to struct mystruct *
> at the beginning of the callback as you propose here. I prefer this cast
> to be explicit (as proposed here) rather than hidden within the entire
> function call (void *) cast.
> 

OK, so you prefer that, I don't, but I also don't care, so I could
easily change it.


> > Let me explain this again:
> > 
> > 	DECLARE_TRACE(name, proto, args);
> > 
> > Will call the function like:
> > 
> > 	callback(args, data);
> > 
> > The callback will be at best:
> > 
> > 	int callback(proto, void *data);
> > 
> > 
> > because the data being passed in is not defined yet. It is defined at
> > the point of the registering of the callback. You can have two callbacks
> > registered to the same tracepoint with two different types as the data
> > field.
> > 
> > So what is it that this check is testing?
> 
> It's making sure that TRACE_EVENT() creates callbacks with the following
> signature:
> 
>   void callback(proto, void *data)
> 
> rather than
> 
>   void callback(proto, struct somestruct *data)
> 
> and forces the cast to be done within the callback rather than casting
> the whole function pointer type to void *, assuming types to match. I
> prefer to leave the cast outside of the tracepoint infrastructure, so we
> do not obfuscate the fact that an explicit type cast is needed there.

Fine, but I hardly see it as obfuscation. But my question again, even if
we do change this. What is this test testing? To me, it is checking that
CPP works.

-- Steve



  reply	other threads:[~2010-04-30 20:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 45+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-04-26 19:50 [PATCH 00/10][RFC] tracing: Lowering the footprint of TRACE_EVENTs Steven Rostedt
2010-04-26 19:50 ` [PATCH 01/10][RFC] tracing: Create class struct for events Steven Rostedt
2010-04-28 20:22   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-04-28 20:38     ` Steven Rostedt
2010-04-26 19:50 ` [PATCH 02/10][RFC] tracing: Let tracepoints have data passed to tracepoint callbacks Steven Rostedt
2010-04-27  9:08   ` Li Zefan
2010-04-27 15:28     ` Steven Rostedt
2010-04-28 20:37   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-04-28 23:56     ` Steven Rostedt
2010-04-26 19:50 ` [PATCH 03/10][RFC] tracing: Convert TRACE_EVENT() to use the DECLARE_TRACE_DATA() Steven Rostedt
2010-04-28 20:39   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-04-28 23:57     ` Steven Rostedt
2010-04-29  0:03       ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-04-26 19:50 ` [PATCH 04/10][RFC] tracing: Remove per event trace registering Steven Rostedt
2010-04-28 20:44   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-04-29  0:00     ` Steven Rostedt
2010-04-29  0:05       ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-04-29  0:20         ` Steven Rostedt
     [not found]           ` <20100429133649.GC14617@Krystal>
2010-04-29 14:06             ` Steven Rostedt
2010-04-29 14:55               ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-04-29 16:06                 ` Steven Rostedt
2010-04-30 17:09                   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-04-30 18:16                     ` Steven Rostedt
2010-04-30 19:06                       ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-04-30 19:48                         ` Steven Rostedt
2010-04-30 20:07                           ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-04-30 20:14                             ` Steven Rostedt [this message]
2010-04-30 21:02                               ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-04-26 19:50 ` [PATCH 05/10][RFC] tracing: Move fields from event to class structure Steven Rostedt
2010-04-28 20:58   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-04-29  0:02     ` Steven Rostedt
     [not found]       ` <20100429133213.GA14617@Krystal>
2010-04-29 13:50         ` Steven Rostedt
2010-04-26 19:50 ` [PATCH 06/10][RFC] tracing: Move raw_init from events to class Steven Rostedt
2010-04-28 21:00   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-04-26 19:50 ` [PATCH 07/10][RFC] tracing: Allow events to share their print functions Steven Rostedt
2010-04-28 21:03   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-04-26 19:50 ` [PATCH 08/10][RFC] tracing: Move print functions into event class Steven Rostedt
2010-04-28 21:03   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-04-26 19:50 ` [PATCH 09/10][RFC] tracing: Remove duplicate id information in event structure Steven Rostedt
2010-04-28 21:06   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-04-29  0:04     ` Steven Rostedt
2010-04-26 19:50 ` [PATCH 10/10][RFC] tracing: Combine event filter_active and enable into single flags field Steven Rostedt
2010-04-28 21:13   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2010-04-28 14:45 ` [PATCH 00/10][RFC] tracing: Lowering the footprint of TRACE_EVENTs Masami Hiramatsu
2010-04-28 20:18 ` Mathieu Desnoyers

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1272658477.9739.201.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com \
    --to=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=acme@redhat.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=compudj@krystal.dyndns.org \
    --cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=laijs@cn.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lizf@cn.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=mhiramat@redhat.com \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®