From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: jp_ikaheimonen@mentor.com (Ikaheimonen, JP) Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2013 14:26:14 +0000 Subject: [lttng-dev] [PATCH lttng-ust 7/7] Add a check against excluders In-Reply-To: <692188761.67141.1384439117906.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> References: <1383819755-6891-1-git-send-email-jp_ikaheimonen@mentor.com> <1383819755-6891-8-git-send-email-jp_ikaheimonen@mentor.com> <682132616.66259.1384351513959.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> <009B25148989C6458484484699278506E539FA81@EU-MBX-01.mgc.mentorg.com> <692188761.67141.1384439117906.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> Message-ID: <009B25148989C6458484484699278506E539FBC7@EU-MBX-01.mgc.mentorg.com> Thank you! JP -----Original Message----- From: Mathieu Desnoyers [mailto:mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com] Sent: 14. marraskuuta 2013 16:25 To: Ikaheimonen, JP Cc: lttng-dev at lists.lttng.org Subject: Re: [lttng-dev] [PATCH lttng-ust 7/7] Add a check against excluders Not needed, I already fixed it. Thanks, Mathieu ----- Original Message ----- > From: "JP Ikaheimonen" > To: "Mathieu Desnoyers" > Cc: lttng-dev at lists.lttng.org > Sent: Thursday, November 14, 2013 2:26:33 AM > Subject: RE: [lttng-dev] [PATCH lttng-ust 7/7] Add a check against > excluders > > Thank you Mathieu! > I will make these changes and resubmit this one patch. > > Cheers, > JP > > -----Original Message----- > From: Mathieu Desnoyers [mailto:mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com] > Sent: 13. marraskuuta 2013 16:05 > To: Ikaheimonen, JP > Cc: lttng-dev at lists.lttng.org > Subject: Re: [lttng-dev] [PATCH lttng-ust 7/7] Add a check against > excluders > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "JP Ikaheimonen" > > To: lttng-dev at lists.lttng.org > > Sent: Thursday, November 7, 2013 5:22:35 AM > > Subject: [lttng-dev] [PATCH lttng-ust 7/7] Add a check against > > excluders > > > > When matching enablers with events, first check against all > > excluders of the enabler. If the event matches with any of the > > excluders, then the event does not match with the enabler. > > > > Signed-off-by: JP Ikaheimonen > > --- > > liblttng-ust/lttng-events.c | 23 +++++++++++++++++++++++ > > 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/liblttng-ust/lttng-events.c > > b/liblttng-ust/lttng-events.c index 915cffb..fa5596c 100644 > > --- a/liblttng-ust/lttng-events.c > > +++ b/liblttng-ust/lttng-events.c > > @@ -491,6 +491,29 @@ static > > int lttng_desc_match_enabler(const struct lttng_event_desc *desc, > > struct lttng_enabler *enabler) > > { > > + struct lttng_ust_excluder_node *excluder; > > + > > + /* If event matches with an excluder, return 'does not match' */ > > + cds_list_for_each_entry(excluder, &enabler->excluder_head, node) { > > + int found = 0; > > Why is "found" declared here ? Why is it initialized to 0 ? > > > > + int count, len; > > + char *excluder_name; > > + > > + for (count = 0; count < excluder->excluder.count; count++) { > > Rather than declared here ? > > > > + excluder_name = (char *)(excluder->excluder.names) > > + + count * LTTNG_UST_SYM_NAME_LEN; > > + len = strnlen(excluder_name, LTTNG_UST_SYM_NAME_LEN); > > + if (len > 0 && excluder_name[len - 1] == '*') { > > + found = strncmp(desc->name, excluder_name, len - 1); > > strncmp and "found" have reversed logic. I'd assign found = !strncmp(....). > > > + } else { > > + found = strncmp(desc->name, excluder_name, > > + LTTNG_UST_SYM_NAME_LEN - 1); > > + } > > + if (!found) { > > and reverse this condition. > > The other patches in this patchset look good !! Good job !! > > Thanks, > > Mathieu > > > + return 0; > > + } > > + } > > + } > > switch (enabler->type) { > > case LTTNG_ENABLER_WILDCARD: > > return lttng_desc_match_wildcard_enabler(desc, enabler); > > -- > > 1.8.1.2 > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > lttng-dev mailing list > > lttng-dev at lists.lttng.org > > http://lists.lttng.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lttng-dev > > > > -- > Mathieu Desnoyers > EfficiOS Inc. > http://www.efficios.com > -- Mathieu Desnoyers EfficiOS Inc. http://www.efficios.com