This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the systemtap project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: user instruction tracing patch?

On Fri, 2007-11-16 at 16:24 -0500, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
> Hi -
> On Fri, Nov 16, 2007 at 01:07:47PM -0800, Jim Keniston wrote:
> > [...]
> > Sorry, I still don't get it then.  Given
> > 	probe program("/bin/vi").function("malloc") if (mp) { .. }
> > if some handler executes
> > 	mp = 1;
> > how does stap know which instance(s) of vi to probe?
> None of this exists yet, but it should work similarly to kprobes
> where lack of probe point qualification means "all of them".  So
>    probe program("/bin/vi").function("malloc")  { }
> would be a request to probe all running (and forseeably, any future)
> copies of vi.  To filter further, I imagine additional qualifiers such
> as ".pid(NUM)", ".uid(NUM)".  These are all to identify the potential
> probing target processes.

In the above examples, if NUM could be a variable name, then I think
we're in business... especially if it could be a set of pids or uids
(implemented as, or perhaps explicitly, an associative array?).  (I can
always dream...)

> The conditional enable/disable stuff is intended to be orthogonal.
> They do not create or destroy probing targets/opportunities, merely
> turn them on or off.
> - FChE


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]