From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17703 invoked by alias); 10 Mar 2012 08:55:06 -0000 Received: (qmail 17693 invoked by uid 22791); 10 Mar 2012 08:55:05 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sat, 10 Mar 2012 08:54:40 +0000 Received: from int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.24]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q2A8scgM019734 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Sat, 10 Mar 2012 03:54:38 -0500 Received: from host2.jankratochvil.net (ovpn-116-19.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.19]) by int-mx11.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q2A8sX3G006234 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Sat, 10 Mar 2012 03:54:36 -0500 Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2012 08:55:00 -0000 From: Jan Kratochvil To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: Sergio Durigan Junior , gdb-patches@sourceware.org, tromey@redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Implement support for SystemTap probes on userspace Message-ID: <20120310085433.GA26446@host2.jankratochvil.net> References: <83haxwzy92.fsf@gnu.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <83haxwzy92.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2012-03/txt/msg00370.txt.bz2 On Sat, 10 Mar 2012 08:55:05 +0100, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > sergio@psique ~/work/src/git/stap-patches/build-64/gdb $ ./gdb -q /tmp/stap-example > > (gdb) info probes > > Provider Name Where Semaphore Object > > teste m4 0x0000000000400505 0x00000000006009f8 /tmp/stap-example > > teste ps 0x00000000004004cd 0x00000000006009fc /tmp/stap-example > > teste two 0x0000000000400484 0x00000000006009f6 /tmp/stap-example > > teste two 0x0000000000400497 0x00000000006009f6 /tmp/stap-example > > teste user 0x00000000004004ad 0x00000000006009f4 /tmp/stap-example > > May I suggest that the new command be called "info stap-probes" > instead? IMO, "probe" is much too general, and may conflict in the > future with some other feature that uses similar facilities or > terminology. There can be "info probes stap" and "info probes foo" in the future with "info probes" calling all the existing probe backends. Like "show" shows all variables. (I have also "info auto-load" in this still but it has not yet been posted.) > > As you can see above, there are 5 probes in the binary. We can now ask > > GDB to put a breakpoint in a probe, by using the new option `-p' or > > `-probe' in the `break' command: > > > > (gdb) b -probe m4 > > Breakpoint 1 at 0x400505 > > Again, either "break -stap-probe" or even just "break -stap" would be > better, IMO. Again -probe may try to find that probe in all the probe backends, later extensible by -probe-stap and -probe-foo? Before a real review, so it is a bikeshed. Jan