From: "guanglei at cn dot ibm dot com" <sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org>
To: systemtap@sources.redhat.com
Subject: [Bug runtime/2497] STP_STRING_SIZE set by stap is too small
Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2006 00:17:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060405001716.13290.qmail@sourceware.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060330093952.2497.guanglei@cn.ibm.com>
------- Additional Comments From guanglei at cn dot ibm dot com 2006-04-05 00:17 -------
(In reply to comment #11)
> OK, I see the problem. It seems the simplest thing is to just do what
> you proposed and either increase STP_STRING_SIZE or make it definable on
> the command line, or both. The only remaining use of STP_STRING_SIZE is
> for strings used while doing stack traces, so it seems like a good idea
> to set it higher by default, because the current default is not useful.
> Maybe 512 or 1024?
I think only making STP_STRING_SIZE definable is ok. But it may be better if we
can also increase the default value of STP_STRING_SIZE to 512, which should have
no side effect. 512 is my estimated and I think it should be enough.
> You can check in the change, or I will if you prefer.
Oh, I don't have the permissions to check into CVS. It's good if you can do this
for me.
> By the way, in the above example, what is the purpose of
> this_event_len()? It seems that you have defined "%n" to write the
> length of the finished string to that location, but why does that need
> an argument?
this_event_len() will always 0 for LKET, the real length will be calculated at
the end of bin_vsnwrite. So this_event_len() is just showing that the current
argument represents the length of the data to be written.
--
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2497
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-04-05 0:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-03-30 9:39 [Bug runtime/2497] New: " guanglei at cn dot ibm dot com
2006-03-30 11:45 ` [Bug runtime/2497] " fche at redhat dot com
2006-03-30 14:29 ` jrs at us dot ibm dot com
2006-03-31 2:50 ` bibo dot mao at intel dot com
2006-03-31 13:35 ` guanglei at cn dot ibm dot com
2006-03-31 14:35 ` fche at redhat dot com
2006-03-31 14:49 ` guanglei at cn dot ibm dot com
2006-03-31 17:49 ` hunt at redhat dot com
2006-04-03 3:43 ` guanglei at cn dot ibm dot com
2006-04-04 0:38 ` Martin Hunt
2006-04-04 0:38 ` hunt at redhat dot com
2006-04-04 14:56 ` Frank Ch. Eigler
2006-04-04 2:08 ` guij at cn dot ibm dot com
2006-04-04 19:31 ` Martin Hunt
2006-04-04 19:31 ` hunt at redhat dot com
2006-04-05 0:17 ` guanglei at cn dot ibm dot com [this message]
2006-04-12 19:21 ` hunt at redhat dot com
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20060405001716.13290.qmail@sourceware.org \
--to=sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org \
--cc=systemtap@sources.redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).