This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: malloc probes for Systemtap
On Oct 10, 2012, Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Oct 8, 2012, "Carlos O'Donell" <carlos@systemhalted.org> wrote:
>> (1) Probes in their own section in the manual.
>> The level of details we need for probes means we should be putting
>> them into a section in the manual and that such a section should have
>> an ABI disclaimer.
> Will do.
>> (2) Probe name should contain the group prefix.
>> Using the group prefix as the probe name, rather than the function,
>> allows for a clear distinction between the purpose of the probe and
>> it's position. The purpose of the probe is IMO what is important and
>> will dictate parameter selection.
> Should the group prefix be malloc, as in the directory name where the
> probed code is, or memory, as in the manual chapter that covers them?
> I'm leaning towards the latter, just because it makes for less confusing
> probe names. Say, memory_realloc_retry and memory_malloc_retry sound
> better than malloc_realloc_retry and malloc(_malloc)?_retry IMHO.
I've just pushed an updated lxoliva/malloc-probes-bz742038 branch that
introduces manual/probes.texi and renames all new probes to start with
memory_.
Since there aren't any other functional changes to the large patchset,
I'm not posting it again, but if you want me to do so to make the review
easier, just let me know and I will.
--
Alexandre Oliva, freedom fighter http://FSFLA.org/~lxoliva/
You must be the change you wish to see in the world. -- Gandhi
Be Free! -- http://FSFLA.org/ FSF Latin America board member
Free Software Evangelist Red Hat Brazil Compiler Engineer