Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
To: Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>
Cc: sergiodj@redhat.com, gdb-patches@sourceware.org, tromey@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Implement support for SystemTap probes on userspace
Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2012 09:06:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <83eht0zuyf.fsf@gnu.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120310085433.GA26446@host2.jankratochvil.net>

> Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2012 09:54:33 +0100
> From: Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>
> Cc: Sergio Durigan Junior <sergiodj@redhat.com>, gdb-patches@sourceware.org,
>         tromey@redhat.com
> 
> > 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.

Works for me.  Or maybe "info sdt-probes" that would cover all of the
varieties of this kind of probes, as in my other suggestion.

> > >     (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?

Could be.  Or "break -std-probe", which is general enough to cover
several varieties, and yet less general than just "-probe".

Thanks.


  reply	other threads:[~2012-03-10  9:06 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-03-09 20:29 Sergio Durigan Junior
2012-03-09 20:32 ` [PATCH 1/3] Refactor internal variable mechanism Sergio Durigan Junior
2012-03-09 21:03   ` Tom Tromey
2012-03-10  4:02     ` Sergio Durigan Junior
2012-03-09 20:34 ` [PATCH 3/3] Use longjmp and exception probes when available Sergio Durigan Junior
2012-03-09 20:34 ` [PATCH 2/3] Implement new features needed for handling SystemTap probes Sergio Durigan Junior
2012-03-10  8:38   ` Eli Zaretskii
2012-03-10 16:56   ` Mark Kettenis
2012-03-12 15:11     ` Tom Tromey
2012-03-13  8:58       ` Mark Kettenis
2012-03-13 16:06         ` Sergio Durigan Junior
2012-03-15 20:44         ` Tom Tromey
2012-03-16 14:52           ` Mark Kettenis
2012-03-16 18:17             ` Tom Tromey
2012-03-10 19:22   ` Jan Kratochvil
2012-03-12 20:37     ` Tom Tromey
2012-03-12 23:15       ` Jan Kratochvil
2012-03-15 15:40         ` Pedro Alves
2012-03-15 15:36   ` Pedro Alves
2012-03-15 20:50     ` Tom Tromey
2012-03-09 21:15 ` [PATCH 0/3] Implement support for SystemTap probes on userspace Tom Tromey
2012-03-10  3:51   ` Sergio Durigan Junior
2012-03-10  7:55 ` Eli Zaretskii
2012-03-10  8:55   ` Jan Kratochvil
2012-03-10  9:06     ` Eli Zaretskii [this message]
2012-03-10 15:52       ` Sergio Durigan Junior
2012-03-12 19:59   ` Tom Tromey

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=83eht0zuyf.fsf@gnu.org \
    --to=eliz@gnu.org \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
    --cc=jan.kratochvil@redhat.com \
    --cc=sergiodj@redhat.com \
    --cc=tromey@redhat.com \
    /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