[ltt-dev] [UST PATCH] Remove all "usterr.h" references in libusctl/ustcomm
Mathieu Desnoyers
compudj at krystal.dyndns.org
Fri Apr 1 17:09:25 EDT 2011
* Nils Carlson (nils.carlson at ludd.ltu.se) wrote:
>
> On Apr 1, 2011, at 10:51 PM, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
>
>> * Nils Carlson (nils.carlson at ludd.ltu.se) wrote:
>>>
>>> On Apr 1, 2011, at 10:24 PM, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
>>>
>>>> * Nils Carlson (nils.carlson at ludd.ltu.se) wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Apr 1, 2011, at 5:14 PM, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> * Nils Carlson (nils.carlson at ericsson.com) wrote:
>>>>>>> This patch removes all references to usterr.h and functions in
>>>>>>> usterr.h from libustctl and ustcomm. This is done for three
>>>>>>> reasons:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1. DBG, ERR, PERROR etc call in ust_safe_snprintf, I don't know
>>>>>>> why, and I can't figure out any good reasons. If somebody
>>>>>>> can enlighten me I would be very grateful. The only thing
>>>>>>> I can figure out is that these are some sort of "signal safe"
>>>>>>> printf.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yep, that's right.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2. All this stuff is quite stable and working and libraries
>>>>>>> really
>>>>>>> shouldn't be printing stuff.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What I disagree about the patch below is that you are removing
>>>>>> debug
>>>>>> error printouts without taking care of some of the error values in
>>>>>> many
>>>>>> cases (just ignoring them).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So we start from a dubtious behavior (debug error messages was not
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> proper way to handle error values; they should rather have been
>>>>>> treated
>>>>>> and pushed to the callers), to just ignoring the errors, which is
>>>>>> kind
>>>>>> of bad, you know... ;)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So I would expect that all the error values you remove debug
>>>>>> messages
>>>>>> from should be dealt with rather than ignored.
>>>>>
>>>>> Hm. errno's are still there... As long as errnos aren't overwritten
>>>>> they
>>>>> can still be used. Can't find anywhere where we are making calls
>>>>> that
>>>>> should overwrite errnos. We could try to introduce consistency in
>>>>> returning negative errno's though. That would be a separate patch.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 3. This allows me to compile lttng-tools without linking
>>>>>>> libustctl
>>>>>>> to the ust_snprintf family of functions. This makes me happy.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well, you could just create a set of debug macros that use the
>>>>>> standard
>>>>>> printf, and decide at compile-time if the log output is built
>>>>>> or not
>>>>>> with these pretty simple macros. This change would make more sense
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> me
>>>>>> than removing the debugging code we have there.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Well, could do that... but as noted, this is pretty stable stuff
>>>>> and
>>>>> we
>>>>> can add debug code as needed I think.
>>>>>
>>>>>> More comments below,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Mathieu, enlighten me as best you can... :-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Nils Carlson <nils.carlson at ericsson.com>
>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>> libustcomm/ustcomm.c | 52 ++++
>>>>>>> +-------------------------------------------
>>>>>>> libustctl/libustctl.c | 13 ++---------
>>>>>>> 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 56 deletions(-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> diff --git a/libustcomm/ustcomm.c b/libustcomm/ustcomm.c
>>>>>>> index dcf8cd8..2a5acc7 100644
>>>>>>> --- a/libustcomm/ustcomm.c
>>>>>>> +++ b/libustcomm/ustcomm.c
>>>>>>> @@ -29,13 +29,14 @@
>>>>>>> #include <sys/epoll.h>
>>>>>>> #include <sys/stat.h>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> +#include <stdarg.h>
>>>>>>> #include <stdio.h>
>>>>>>> #include <stdlib.h>
>>>>>>> #include <string.h>
>>>>>>> #include <execinfo.h>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> #include "ustcomm.h"
>>>>>>> -#include "usterr.h"
>>>>>>> +#include <ust/core.h>
>>>>>>> #include "share.h"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> static int mkdir_p(const char *path, mode_t mode)
>>>>>>> @@ -101,7 +102,6 @@ static struct sockaddr_un *
>>>>>>> create_sock_addr(const char *name,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> addr = malloc(alloc_size);
>>>>>>> if (addr < 0) {
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hrm, the original test is bogus there ? malloc returns NULL if
>>>>>> alloc
>>>>>> fails, not a negative value... ?
>>>>>
>>>>> True... Could fix that in a seperate patch.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - ERR("allocating addr failed");
>>>>>>> return NULL;
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> @@ -149,9 +149,7 @@ void ustcomm_del_sock(struct ustcomm_sock
>>>>>>> *sock,
>>>>>>> int keep_in_epoll)
>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>> cds_list_del(&sock->list);
>>>>>>> if (!keep_in_epoll) {
>>>>>>> - if (epoll_ctl(sock->epoll_fd, EPOLL_CTL_DEL, sock->fd,
>>>>>>> NULL) ==
>>>>>>> -1) {
>>>>>>> - PERROR("epoll_ctl: failed to delete socket");
>>>>>>> - }
>>>>>>> + epoll_ctl(sock->epoll_fd, EPOLL_CTL_DEL, sock->fd, NULL);
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think we should keep the error value test here ?
>>>>>
>>>>> No, EPOLL_CTL_DEL can only return error ENONENT, if there was no fd
>>>>> with
>>>>> that fd number, in which cas everything anyway is fine.
>>>>
>>>> This is the kind of obvious safety net we should leave in place.
>>>> It's
>>>> not because we expect that we'll always pass a valid FD that we
>>>> won't
>>>> have a bug creeping in at some point, and checking the returned
>>>> error
>>>> value is the kind of safety measure that will help us diagnose
>>>> problems
>>>> much more quickly in the long run.
>>> hm. Remember, this is a tracing library. It should be quiet.
>>>
>>> What do you suggest we do with the error? the function doesn't return
>>> anything.
>>> The only thing we can do is spew out a error message, which if we are
>>> lucky may be reported, probably be ignored, and in worst case screw
>>> up a
>>> program using stdout/stderr for something.
>>>
>>> Maybe we should discuss this though. What should UST do/not-do.
>>> Should
>>> UST ever throw stuff out on stdout/stderr?
>>
>> Aren't these text error messages already channeled through separate
>> file
>> descriptors through UST-specific log files which are saved along the
>> recorded traces ?
>>
> Nope, go straight to stderr. We could discuss logfiles though, but then
> they should be configured by an environment variable, ie. not on by
> default.
It depends. This brings the general question of error handling in
libust. Basically, I would recommend an approach similar to what I do in
the Linux kernel, where a tracer error just disables tracing rather than
stop the kernel (or in this case, does not kill the application).
So I don't see that showing the error messages in the app stderr is very
much appropriate, because we can be tracing applications that have
stderr redirected to /dev/null, so trying to use the normal stderr
output of the application can hide problems. On the other hand, if we
send libust error output to ltt-sessiond, so it can be sent to the
"lttng" command line tool, then the user interacting with the tracing
session will have the error output of all the programs it controls in a
centralized location, which seems much more reliable.
>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>> close(sock->fd);
>>>>>>> free(sock);
>>>>>>> @@ -168,13 +166,11 @@ struct ustcomm_sock *
>>>>>>> ustcomm_init_named_socket(const char *name,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> fd = socket(PF_UNIX, SOCK_STREAM, 0);
>>>>>>> if(fd == -1) {
>>>>>>> - PERROR("socket");
>>>>>>> return NULL;
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> addr = create_sock_addr(name, &sock_addr_size);
>>>>>>> if (addr == NULL) {
>>>>>>> - ERR("allocating addr, UST thread bailing");
>>>>>>> goto close_sock;
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> @@ -182,29 +178,24 @@ struct ustcomm_sock *
>>>>>>> ustcomm_init_named_socket(const char *name,
>>>>>>> if(result == 0) {
>>>>>>> /* file exists */
>>>>>>> result = unlink(name);
>>>>>>> - if(result == -1) {
>>>>>>> - PERROR("unlink of socket file");
>>>>>>> + if (result == -1) {
>>>>>>> goto free_addr;
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>> - DBG("socket already exists; overwriting");
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> result = bind(fd, (struct sockaddr *)addr, sock_addr_size);
>>>>>>> if(result == -1) {
>>>>>>> - PERROR("bind");
>>>>>>> goto free_addr;
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> result = listen(fd, 1);
>>>>>>> if(result == -1) {
>>>>>>> - PERROR("listen");
>>>>>>> goto free_addr;
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> sock = ustcomm_init_sock(fd, epoll_fd,
>>>>>>> NULL);
>>>>>>> if (!sock) {
>>>>>>> - ERR("failed to create ustcomm_sock");
>>>>>>> goto free_addr;
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> @@ -236,39 +227,31 @@ void ustcomm_del_named_sock(struct
>>>>>>> ustcomm_sock *sock,
>>>>>>> /* Get the socket name */
>>>>>>> alloc_size = sizeof(dummy);
>>>>>>> if (getsockname(fd, &dummy, (socklen_t *)&alloc_size) < 0) {
>>>>>>> - PERROR("getsockname failed");
>>>>>>> goto del_sock;
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> sockaddr = zmalloc(alloc_size);
>>>>>>> if (!sockaddr) {
>>>>>>> - ERR("failed to allocate sockaddr");
>>>>>>> goto del_sock;
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> if (getsockname(fd, sockaddr, (socklen_t *)&alloc_size) < 0) {
>>>>>>> - PERROR("getsockname failed");
>>>>>>> goto free_sockaddr;
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> /* Destroy socket */
>>>>>>> result = stat(sockaddr->sun_path, &st);
>>>>>>> if(result < 0) {
>>>>>>> - PERROR("stat (%s)", sockaddr->sun_path);
>>>>>>> goto free_sockaddr;
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> /* Paranoid check before deleting. */
>>>>>>> result = S_ISSOCK(st.st_mode);
>>>>>>> if(!result) {
>>>>>>> - ERR("The socket we are about to delete is not a socket.");
>>>>>>> goto free_sockaddr;
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - result = unlink(sockaddr->sun_path);
>>>>>>> - if(result < 0) {
>>>>>>> - PERROR("unlink");
>>>>>>> - }
>>>>>>> + unlink(sockaddr->sun_path);
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Should we do something with the error here ? Why is it not treated
>>>>>> (if
>>>>>> there is a reason, we should add a comment)
>>>>>
>>>>> hm, could add a comment but not much point. This is just cleanup
>>>>> after
>>>>> all, if it fails we can't do anything about it and it won't affect
>>>>> anything.
>>>>
>>>> I recommend this to ensure that all return values are either
>>>>
>>>> - treated, or
>>>> - documented.
>>>>
>>>> looking at unlink(2), there are many reasons why unlink can fail. If
>>>> it
>>>> fails due to incorrect access rights (for instance), we probably
>>>> want
>>>> to
>>>> propagate the error up to the user, no ?
>>>
>>> For what? Nothing the user can/should do anyway.
>>
>> Reporting when the developer/distribution screw things up, mostly. :)
>> I've got used to expect all the unexpected ways things can go wrong
>> with
>> projects deployed in a wide range of environments by yet unknown
>> people.
>>
>> Reporting errors should not be about reporting expected error cases,
>> but
>> covering all the paths.
>>
>
> Sounds good in theory, but again, what do we want to send out? this is a
> void function.
I agree that this is a teardown function, so normally returns void. But
we could at least print the error message to tell the user that
something is fishy.
>
> But the logfile turned on by an environment variable may not be a bad
> idea. This way users could turn it on to check for strange behaviour.
>
> Why do we want the signal safe printf by the way? When are we using this
> stuff in signal handlers?
This is used when printing error/debugging from the tracing probe site,
which can be run in signal context (if signal handlers are
instrumented).
Thanks,
Mathieu
>
> /Nils
>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Mathieu
>>
>>>
>>> /Nils
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> Mathieu
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> /Nils
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Mathieu
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> free_sockaddr:
>>>>>>> @@ -297,7 +280,6 @@ int ustcomm_recv_alloc(int sock,
>>>>>>> } else if (errno == EINTR) {
>>>>>>> return -1;
>>>>>>> } else if (result < 0) {
>>>>>>> - PERROR("recv");
>>>>>>> return -1;
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>> return 0;
>>>>>>> @@ -326,7 +308,6 @@ int ustcomm_recv_alloc(int sock,
>>>>>>> result = recvmsg(sock, &msg, MSG_WAITALL);
>>>>>>> if (result < 0) {
>>>>>>> free(*data);
>>>>>>> - PERROR("recvmsg failed");
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> return result;
>>>>>>> @@ -355,7 +336,6 @@ int ustcomm_recv_fd(int sock,
>>>>>>> } else if (errno == EINTR) {
>>>>>>> return -1;
>>>>>>> } else if (result < 0) {
>>>>>>> - PERROR("recv");
>>>>>>> return -1;
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>> return 0;
>>>>>>> @@ -372,7 +352,6 @@ int ustcomm_recv_fd(int sock,
>>>>>>> if (peek_header.size && data) {
>>>>>>> if (peek_header.size < 0 ||
>>>>>>> peek_header.size > USTCOMM_DATA_SIZE) {
>>>>>>> - ERR("big peek header! %ld", peek_header.size);
>>>>>>> return 0;
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> @@ -389,9 +368,6 @@ int ustcomm_recv_fd(int sock,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> result = recvmsg(sock, &msg, MSG_WAITALL);
>>>>>>> if (result <= 0) {
>>>>>>> - if (result < 0) {
>>>>>>> - PERROR("recvmsg failed");
>>>>>>> - }
>>>>>>> return result;
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> @@ -407,9 +383,6 @@ int ustcomm_recv_fd(int sock,
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>> cmsg = CMSG_NXTHDR(&msg, cmsg);
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>> - if (!result) {
>>>>>>> - ERR("Failed to receive file descriptor\n");
>>>>>>> - }
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> return 1;
>>>>>>> @@ -430,7 +403,6 @@ int ustcomm_send_fd(int sock,
>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>> struct iovec iov[2];
>>>>>>> struct msghdr msg;
>>>>>>> - int result;
>>>>>>> struct cmsghdr *cmsg;
>>>>>>> char buf[CMSG_SPACE(sizeof(int))];
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> @@ -461,11 +433,7 @@ int ustcomm_send_fd(int sock,
>>>>>>> msg.msg_controllen = cmsg->cmsg_len;
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - result = sendmsg(sock, &msg, MSG_NOSIGNAL);
>>>>>>> - if (result < 0 && errno != EPIPE) {
>>>>>>> - PERROR("sendmsg failed");
>>>>>>> - }
>>>>>>> - return result;
>>>>>>> + return sendmsg(sock, &msg, MSG_NOSIGNAL);
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> int ustcomm_send(int sock,
>>>>>>> @@ -504,19 +472,16 @@ int ustcomm_connect_path(const char *name,
>>>>>>> int
>>>>>>> *connection_fd)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> fd = socket(PF_UNIX, SOCK_STREAM, 0);
>>>>>>> if(fd == -1) {
>>>>>>> - PERROR("socket");
>>>>>>> return -1;
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> addr = create_sock_addr(name, &sock_addr_size);
>>>>>>> if (addr == NULL) {
>>>>>>> - ERR("allocating addr failed");
>>>>>>> goto close_sock;
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> result = connect(fd, (struct sockaddr *)addr, sock_addr_size);
>>>>>>> if(result == -1) {
>>>>>>> - PERROR("connect (path=%s)", name);
>>>>>>> goto free_sock_addr;
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> @@ -543,7 +508,6 @@ char *ustcomm_user_sock_dir(void)
>>>>>>> result = asprintf(&sock_dir, "%s%s", USER_SOCK_DIR,
>>>>>>> cuserid(NULL));
>>>>>>> if (result < 0) {
>>>>>>> - ERR("string overflow allocating directory name");
>>>>>>> return NULL;
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> @@ -569,14 +533,12 @@ static int connect_app_non_root(pid_t pid,
>>>>>>> int
>>>>>>> *app_fd)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> result = asprintf(&sock_name, "%s/%d", dir_name, pid);
>>>>>>> if (result < 0) {
>>>>>>> - ERR("failed to allocate socket name");
>>>>>>> retval = -1;
>>>>>>> goto free_dir_name;
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> result = ustcomm_connect_path(sock_name, app_fd);
>>>>>>> if (result < 0) {
>>>>>>> - ERR("failed to connect to app");
>>>>>>> retval = -1;
>>>>>>> goto free_sock_name;
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>> @@ -657,14 +619,12 @@ int ensure_dir_exists(const char *dir,
>>>>>>> mode_t
>>>>>>> mode)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> result = mkdir_p(dir, mode);
>>>>>>> if(result != 0) {
>>>>>>> - ERR("executing in recursive creation of directory %s", dir);
>>>>>>> return -1;
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>> } else {
>>>>>>> if (st.st_mode != mode) {
>>>>>>> result = chmod(dir, mode);
>>>>>>> if (result < 0) {
>>>>>>> - ERR("couldn't set directory mode on %s", dir);
>>>>>>> return -1;
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>> diff --git a/libustctl/libustctl.c b/libustctl/libustctl.c
>>>>>>> index 1911434..b5d6a02 100644
>>>>>>> --- a/libustctl/libustctl.c
>>>>>>> +++ b/libustctl/libustctl.c
>>>>>>> @@ -17,6 +17,7 @@
>>>>>>> */
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> #define _GNU_SOURCE
>>>>>>> +#include <errno.h>
>>>>>>> #include <stdio.h>
>>>>>>> #include <unistd.h>
>>>>>>> #include <getopt.h>
>>>>>>> @@ -26,8 +27,8 @@
>>>>>>> #include <dirent.h>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> #include "ustcomm.h"
>>>>>>> -#include "ust/ustctl.h"
>>>>>>> -#include "usterr.h"
>>>>>>> +#include <ust/ustctl.h>
>>>>>>> +#include <ust/core.h>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> static int do_cmd(int sock,
>>>>>>> const struct ustcomm_header *req_header,
>>>>>>> @@ -57,7 +58,6 @@ static int do_cmd(int sock,
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>> } else {
>>>>>>> - ERR("ustcomm req failed");
>>>>>>> if (result == 0) {
>>>>>>> saved_errno = ENOTCONN;
>>>>>>> } else {
>>>>>>> @@ -80,7 +80,6 @@ int ustctl_connect_pid(pid_t pid)
>>>>>>> int sock;
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> if (ustcomm_connect_app(pid, &sock)) {
>>>>>>> - ERR("could not connect to PID %u", (unsigned int) pid);
>>>>>>> errno = ENOTCONN;
>>>>>>> return -1;
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>> @@ -580,20 +579,17 @@ int ustctl_get_cmsf(int sock, struct
>>>>>>> marker_status **cmsf)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> result = ustcomm_send(sock, &req_header, NULL);
>>>>>>> if (result <= 0) {
>>>>>>> - PERROR("error while requesting markers list");
>>>>>>> return -1;
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> result = ustcomm_recv_alloc(sock, &res_header, &big_str);
>>>>>>> if (result <= 0) {
>>>>>>> - ERR("error while receiving markers list");
>>>>>>> return -1;
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> tmp_cmsf = (struct marker_status *) zmalloc(sizeof(struct
>>>>>>> marker_status) *
>>>>>>> (ustctl_count_nl(big_str) + 1));
>>>>>>> if (tmp_cmsf == NULL) {
>>>>>>> - ERR("Failed to allocate CMSF array");
>>>>>>> return -1;
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> @@ -672,13 +668,11 @@ int ustctl_get_tes(int sock, struct
>>>>>>> trace_event_status **tes)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> result = ustcomm_send(sock, &req_header, NULL);
>>>>>>> if (result != 1) {
>>>>>>> - ERR("error while requesting trace_event list");
>>>>>>> return -1;
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> result = ustcomm_recv_alloc(sock, &res_header, &big_str);
>>>>>>> if (result != 1) {
>>>>>>> - ERR("error while receiving markers list");
>>>>>>> return -1;
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> @@ -686,7 +680,6 @@ int ustctl_get_tes(int sock, struct
>>>>>>> trace_event_status **tes)
>>>>>>> zmalloc(sizeof(struct trace_event_status) *
>>>>>>> (ustctl_count_nl(big_str) + 1));
>>>>>>> if (tmp_tes == NULL) {
>>>>>>> - ERR("Failed to allocate TES array");
>>>>>>> return -1;
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> 1.7.1
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> ltt-dev mailing list
>>>>>>> ltt-dev at lists.casi.polymtl.ca
>>>>>>> http://lists.casi.polymtl.ca/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ltt-dev
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Mathieu Desnoyers
>>>>>> Operating System Efficiency R&D Consultant
>>>>>> EfficiOS Inc.
>>>>>> http://www.efficios.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> ltt-dev mailing list
>>>>>> ltt-dev at lists.casi.polymtl.ca
>>>>>> http://lists.casi.polymtl.ca/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ltt-dev
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Mathieu Desnoyers
>>>> Operating System Efficiency R&D Consultant
>>>> EfficiOS Inc.
>>>> http://www.efficios.com
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Mathieu Desnoyers
>> Operating System Efficiency R&D Consultant
>> EfficiOS Inc.
>> http://www.efficios.com
>
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
Operating System Efficiency R&D Consultant
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com
More information about the lttng-dev
mailing list