From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com (Zhaolei) Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2008 08:51:44 +0800 Subject: [ltt-dev] Updated TODO list before releasing LTTng bufferingtoLKML References: <20081028152143.GD1136@Krystal> <48A9612F918F4C2CAE3A6A6BB05F52A6@zhaoleiwin> <20081029031945.GA1425@Krystal> <9F66E06ECC854BB7BE61B10F6DC813AE@zhaoleiwin> <20081029152317.GB29454@Krystal> Message-ID: <14E89AE05CE84A78AA8BAAB7AB5D6E25@zhaoleiwin> * Mathieu Desnoyers wrote: >* Zhaolei (zhaolei at cn.fujitsu.com) wrote: >> * Mathieu Desnoyers wrote: >> >> > - move ltt/ltt-marker-control.c /proc interface to debugfs >> >> > I think we should integrate its directory tree to the new LTTng tracer >> >> > debugfs API like this : >> >> > >> >> > /debugfs/ltt/events/buffer_name/marker_name/ >> >> > where we find files like : >> >> > state >> >> > write : 1/0 (on/off) >> >> > read : 1/0 (on/off) >> >> > format >> >> > read : marker format string >> >> Hello, Mathieu, >> >> >> >> So we need to create a marker's debugfs-directory when user insmod >> >> a module with markers. >> >> But i think we don't have a callback when user insmod, and we >> >> should avoid to patch kernel/module.c for this kind of function. >> >> >> >> So, maybe we can only "echo marker_name 0/1" > marker-control. >> >> Dou you have suggestion for me? >> >> >> > >> > >> > Yes, we do have a callback in insmod. >> > >> > See : >> > >> > load_module() >> > >> > #ifdef CONFIG_MARKERS >> > if (!mod->taints) >> > marker_update_probe_range(mod->markers, >> > mod->markers + mod->num_markers); >> > #endif >> > >> > We would probably also have to get a callback in free_module to remove >> > the marker directory entry when the last marker reference is gone. The >> > same >> > >> > #ifdef CONFIG_MARKERS >> > if (!mod->taints) >> > marker_update_probe_range(mod->markers, >> > mod->markers + mod->num_markers); >> > #endif >> > >> > Could probably be used in free_module. >> > >> Do you means we insert another callback as markers do? >> as example in insmod: >> #ifdef CONFIG_MARKERS >> if (!mod->taints) >> marker_update_probe_range(mod->markers, >> mod->markers + mod->num_markers); >> #endif >> #ifdef CONFIG_LTT >> if (!mod->taints) >> lttctl_create_dirs(mod->markers, >> mod->markers + mod->num_markers); >> #endif >> >> It it is true, i think because ltt_control will be a kernel module, and we can't >> call a module's function in load_module(). >> >> So, maybe we can do as following: >> 1: make module.c support callbackset. >> add following functions to module.c >> module_register_callback(enum MODULE_CALLBACK_TYPE type, callback_func func); >> module_unregister_callback(LOAD_MODULE, callback_func func); >> >> 2: make marks and ltt_control use new function >> example if ltt_control's >> init() {module_register_callback(LOAD_MODULE, create_debugfs_dir);} >> exit() {module_unregister_callback(LOAD_MODULE, free_debugfs_dir);} >> void create_debugfs_dir(struct module *mod) { >> for (i = 0; i < mod->num_markers; i++ ) >> ... >> } >> > > No, no... > > only marker_update_probe_range() needs to be called form module.c, at > load_module() and exit_module(). > > It will add a marker entry to the hash table when necessary, and > increment/decrement the reference count of this marker entry. The marker > entry can be removed from the hash table when the refcount falls to 0 > and no probe is registered on the marker. > > At the same time the marker entry is added to the hash table, a > debugfs mkdir is done. When the entry is removed from the hash table, a > debugfs rmdir is done. > > Is it a bit more clear ? Hi, Mathieu I see. But IMHO, markers is used by lttng, but is not part of lttng. So, i think source for create files in /debugfs/ltt/... should not be placed in markers.c. > > Mathieu > > > > >> _______________________________________________ >> ltt-dev mailing list >> ltt-dev at lists.casi.polymtl.ca >> http://lists.casi.polymtl.ca/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ltt-dev >> > > -- > Mathieu Desnoyers > OpenPGP key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68 > >