This is the mail archive of the
systemtap@sourceware.org
mailing list for the systemtap project.
Re: [RFC][Patch 0/2] New Probe family : probe kprobe.function()
- From: fche at redhat dot com (Frank Ch. Eigler)
- To: Prerna Saxena <prerna at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com>
- Cc: systemtap at sourceware dot org
- Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2009 12:48:43 -0400
- Subject: Re: [RFC][Patch 0/2] New Probe family : probe kprobe.function()
- References: <49E724C5.2070904@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Prerna Saxena <prerna@linux.vnet.ibm.com> writes:
> Here's a prototype of a new language feature in systemtap : probe
> kprobe [...]
Looks good. I suggest a few changes:
- removal of ".inline"-related logic/variables, since they are inherently
unavailable
- removal of registration/unregistration code that was added for symbolic
kprobes only to optimize the thousands-of-probes case, such as the
char*/char[] automagic selector
- initialization of the new systemtap_session field
- adding test cases, documentation, NEWS blurb
To what extent does the kernel's symbolic kprobe logic allow probes to
be placed within modules? Would it be worthwhile to allow numeric
probe addresses (as in kernel.statement(0xaddr).absolute)?
- FChE