[lttng-dev] [for-next][PATCH 08/20] tracing: Warn if a tracepoint is not set via debugfs

[Steven Rostedt]

On Wed, 12 Mar 2014 16:05:36 +0000 (UTC)
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers at efficios.com> wrote:

> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Steven Rostedt" <rostedt at goodmis.org>
> > To: "Mathieu Desnoyers" <mathieu.desnoyers at efficios.com>
> > Cc: "Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche at redhat.com>, linux-kernel at vger.kernel.org, "Ingo Molnar" <mingo at kernel.org>, "Frederic
> > Weisbecker" <fweisbec at gmail.com>, "Andrew Morton" <akpm at linux-foundation.org>, "Johannes Berg"
> > <johannes.berg at intel.com>, "Linus Torvalds" <torvalds at linux-foundation.org>, "Peter Zijlstra"
> > <peterz at infradead.org>, "Thomas Gleixner" <tglx at linutronix.de>, "Greg Kroah-Hartman" <gregkh at linuxfoundation.org>,
> > "lttng-dev" <lttng-dev at lists.lttng.org>, "Rusty Russell" <rusty at rustcorp.com.au>
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2014 11:46:11 AM
> > Subject: Re: [for-next][PATCH 08/20] tracing: Warn if a tracepoint is not set via debugfs
> > 
> > 
> > To sum up this thread, and get the signal vs noise ratio up.
> > 
> > On Wed, 12 Mar 2014 11:11:00 -0400
> > Steven Rostedt <rostedt at goodmis.org> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > > The solution I like the most that I believe will work for both of us,
> > > is to to move this magic "enable tracepoint in the future" to your
> > > LTTng module. Have your module register a module load and unload handler
> > > to be able to see the tracepoints that exist in the module, and you can
> > > enable them then. When a module is unloaded, your module can do the
> > > accounting to record that, and the state of its tracepoints.
> > 
> > This is my final proposal.
> > 
> > I'll add the patch that removes the tracepoint on failure along with
> > returning -ENODEV. That way, there will be no registered tracepoints
> > that do not exist.
> > 
> > I'll also make sure that on module unload, the tracepoints are disabled
> > for the module as well.
> 
> Do you mean that the tracepoint probe will be unregistered from within
> tracepoint.c whenever all modules containing tracepoint call sites are
> unloaded ? If so, how do you plan to handle ownership of the "name",
> "probe" and "data" pointer ? They belong to the tracer. Would they simply
> leak ?

Are you telling me it's not possible to delete the entire probe?

What I'm proposing is to do what the trace events do. Delete everything
associated to the tracepoints associated to the module.

> 
> > 
> > Then, you can simply add a module notifier that does the work that you
> > like, and save and restore the state of named tracepoints and enabled
> > them on module load. Just set the priority of the notifier to 1
> > so that it runs after the tracepoint notifier that adds the new
> > tracepoints to the system.
> 
> I don't mind the extra work on the LTTng side at all. What I am concerned
> about are changes that would make the tracepoint API sloppy.

I believe they are currently sloppy.

-- Steve