Messages in this thread | | | From | Namhyung Kim <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/4] tools lib traceevent: Add state member to struct trace_seq | Date | Mon, 06 Jan 2014 16:44:18 +0900 |
| |
Hi Jiri,
On Fri, 3 Jan 2014 14:24:25 +0100, Jiri Olsa wrote: > On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 06:34:23PM +0900, Namhyung Kim wrote: >> From: Namhyung Kim <namhyung.kim@lge.com> >> >> The trace_seq->state is for tracking errors during the use of >> trace_seq APIs and getting rid of die() in it. >> >> Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org> >> --- >> tools/lib/traceevent/event-parse.h | 7 +++++++ >> tools/lib/traceevent/trace-seq.c | 41 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---- >> 2 files changed, 44 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/tools/lib/traceevent/event-parse.h b/tools/lib/traceevent/event-parse.h >> index cf5db9013f2c..3c890cb28db7 100644 >> --- a/tools/lib/traceevent/event-parse.h >> +++ b/tools/lib/traceevent/event-parse.h >> @@ -58,6 +58,12 @@ struct pevent_record { >> #endif >> }; >> >> +enum trace_seq_fail { >> + TRACE_SEQ__GOOD, >> + TRACE_SEQ__BUFFER_POISONED, >> + TRACE_SEQ__MEM_ALLOC_FAILED, >> +}; >> + >> /* >> * Trace sequences are used to allow a function to call several other functions >> * to create a string of data to use (up to a max of PAGE_SIZE). >> @@ -68,6 +74,7 @@ struct trace_seq { >> unsigned int buffer_size; >> unsigned int len; >> unsigned int readpos; >> + enum trace_seq_fail state; >> }; >> >> void trace_seq_init(struct trace_seq *s); >> diff --git a/tools/lib/traceevent/trace-seq.c b/tools/lib/traceevent/trace-seq.c >> index d7f2e68bc5b9..976ad2a146b3 100644 >> --- a/tools/lib/traceevent/trace-seq.c >> +++ b/tools/lib/traceevent/trace-seq.c >> @@ -32,8 +32,8 @@ >> #define TRACE_SEQ_POISON ((void *)0xdeadbeef) >> #define TRACE_SEQ_CHECK(s) \ >> do { \ >> - if ((s)->buffer == TRACE_SEQ_POISON) \ >> - die("Usage of trace_seq after it was destroyed"); \ >> + if ((s)->buffer == TRACE_SEQ_POISON) \ >> + (s)->state = TRACE_SEQ__BUFFER_POISONED; \ > > So unless we use trace_seq_do_printf we dont have any > notification that this went wrong..?
Right.
> > How about use some sort of WARN_ONCE any time the state > is set != GOOD ?
I'm not sure what's the right thing to do for that case. Printing a warning message might disturb user's output since it can be in a middle of some (other) processing and she doesn't want to print anything during the processing for some reason.
I just thought that it's not so important to print message so keeps the error internally until it gets printed. But I can be wrong as usual...
Thanks, Namhyung
| |