[lttng-dev] [RFC] LTTng-UST loglevels

[Matthew Khouzam]

Those are per-line example, you don't need IMO to put one tracepoint per
line, you just need the fact that it is at a line level to be called
trace_debug_line

maybe you would put __LINE__ and __FILE__ as arguments for the tracepoint?

On 12-02-14 11:54 AM, Yannick Brosseau wrote:
> What's "per-line" in your example?
>
> On 2012-02-14 11:41, Matthew Khouzam wrote:
>> Two use cases I see for per-line logging:
>> (forgive my pseudocode)
>>
>> func()
>> {
>> stuff();
>> stuff(); tracepoint(mytrace);
>> (morestuff()++)->my_func();
>> }
>>
>>
>> or if you have a 100+ line function and you want to see it arrive at
>> certain checkpoints.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 12-02-13 02:35 PM, Michel Dagenais wrote:
>>>>>         TRACE_DEBUG_SYSTEM      = 7,
>>>>>         TRACE_DEBUG_PROGRAM     = 8,
>>>>>         TRACE_DEBUG_PROCESS     = 9,
>>>>>         TRACE_DEBUG_MODULE      = 10,
>>>>>         TRACE_DEBUG_UNIT        = 11,
>>>>>         TRACE_DEBUG_FUNCTION    = 12,
>>>>>         TRACE_DEBUG_LINE        = 13,
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> I still don't understand how we should choose to use any of the
>>>> TRACE_DEBUG levels.
>>> I would guess that you start at level 7 for everywhere to discover which program is problematic, then you enable level 8 for the problematic program and find the offending process, and so on to dig into a problem up to the "line" level. I would not expect tracepoints at the line level... though.
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> lttng-dev mailing list
>>> lttng-dev at lists.lttng.org
>>> http://lists.lttng.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lttng-dev
>> _______________________________________________
>> lttng-dev mailing list
>> lttng-dev at lists.lttng.org
>> http://lists.lttng.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lttng-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> lttng-dev mailing list
> lttng-dev at lists.lttng.org
> http://lists.lttng.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lttng-dev