public inbox for systemtap@sourceware.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "jkenisto at us dot ibm dot com" <sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org>
To: systemtap@sources.redhat.com
Subject: [Bug translator/5899] $ptr->member in return probe
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 20:20:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080311201921.32462.qmail@sourceware.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080308010658.5899.jkenisto@us.ibm.com>


------- Additional Comments From jkenisto at us dot ibm dot com  2008-03-11 20:19 -------
(In reply to comment #1)
> I think bug #5634 can solve this issue as below:
> $ptr("struct argument")->member
> 

That feature would be useful in general, but I'm not sure how it solves this
problem.  Are you suggesting something like this?

probe kernel.function("myfunc").return
{
    printf("foo->bar on entry was %d\n", $foo->bar);
    foo2 = $foo
    printf("foo->bar on return was %d\n", foo2("struct foo_struct")->bar);
}

I don't think it would be obvious to the average user that $foo->bar gets
evaluated at function entry, but foo2("struct foo_struct")->bar doesn't.

BTW, I said "If I want entry_value($ptr->member), I can just save that value
during my entry probe."  That's kind of optimistic.  The problem is, WHERE would
I save that value, so I know it belongs to this particular function instance? 
Yeah, I could create an associative array indexed by task and (say) stack
pointer (in case of recursion), but that's what this feature was created to
avoid.  In any case, that's just more evidence that we need to get this feature
right.

-- 


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5899

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2008-03-11 20:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-03-08  1:07 [Bug translator/5899] New: " jkenisto at us dot ibm dot com
2008-03-10 22:05 ` [Bug translator/5899] " mhiramat at redhat dot com
2008-03-11 20:20 ` jkenisto at us dot ibm dot com [this message]
2008-03-11 22:00 ` mhiramat at redhat dot com
2008-06-06 14:09 ` mark at klomp dot org
2009-01-23 18:10 ` fche at redhat dot com
2009-01-27 16:50 ` ananth at in dot ibm dot com
2009-01-28  2:39 ` jkenisto at us dot ibm dot com
2009-10-23 23:20 ` roland at gnu dot org
2009-11-12  1:27 ` jistone 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=20080311201921.32462.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).