This is the mail archive of the
systemtap@sourceware.org
mailing list for the systemtap project.
Re: rethinking syscall tapset
- From: James Dickens <jamesd dot wi at gmail dot com>
- To: Martin Hunt <hunt at redhat dot com>
- Cc: "Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange at redhat dot com>, Hien Nguyen <hien at us dot ibm dot com>, "systemtap at sources dot redhat dot com" <systemtap at sources dot redhat dot com>
- Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 17:55:54 -0600
- Subject: Re: rethinking syscall tapset
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=sd+y5tw4ub9YxHaANFDMGTA5m8Ivnd1slazbMvn5pBBnmkaJv1wDAeC7Rx3vPQnMkZh9cfP3cNcSS10vmKt/nVkLcgUef+6S71cQdWx1CI4AKy37xwkTYNSFDRskEH7cLiKxlQnSmAiVhalEI7RHacyhPEU1OzCPWadvBR5QrLI=
- References: <1138689272.3948.17.camel@monkey2> <20060131184357.GB19557@redhat.com> <1138736588.22471.13.camel@monkey2>
On 1/31/06, Martin Hunt <hunt@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-01-31 at 18:43 +0000, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>
> > > I've created another variable all return probes set called "returnp".
> >
> > I'm not clear on the intended use of this, besides enabling both the
> > call & return to be written in one block, using a conditional ?
>
> Basically that's it. It's not a big deal.
>
I don't see a reason to combine both call and return in one block, but
I think it would be nice to be able to access all the arguments used
to call a syscall, in a way that require each syscall written
individually and that is architecturally transparent.
probe syscall.* {
printf(%s ( "%s called with %X(%d), %X(%d) ", probename, arg0,
arg0, arg1, arg1 );
}
this type of script can be quite useful and is much lighter on the
system than strace that only plays games stopping the application at
each syscall.
James Dickens
uadmin.blogspot.com
[snip]