From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10005 invoked by alias); 10 Nov 2015 17:34:44 -0000 Mailing-List: contact systemtap-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: systemtap-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 9981 invoked by uid 89); 10 Nov 2015 17:34:43 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=0.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,BODY_8BITS,GARBLED_BODY,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Tue, 10 Nov 2015 17:34:43 +0000 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9E83E3B3C7; Tue, 10 Nov 2015 17:34:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.3.113.86] (ovpn-113-86.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.113.86]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id tAAHYeYI021032; Tue, 10 Nov 2015 12:34:41 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] add testcases for function definitions To: =?UTF-8?B?WmhvdSwgV2Vuamlhbi/lkajmlofliZE=?= References: <1447059456-19811-1-git-send-email-zhouwj-fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> <5640E0EE.2060803@redhat.com> <56415207.6050905@cn.fujitsu.com> <56415718.2010100@redhat.com> <56415B6E.8030808@cn.fujitsu.com> <56419783.8050005@cn.fujitsu.com> Cc: systemtap@sourceware.org, David Smith From: Josh Stone Message-ID: <56422AB0.1060200@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2015 17:34:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <56419783.8050005@cn.fujitsu.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2015-q4/txt/msg00110.txt.bz2 On 11/09/2015 11:06 PM, "Zhou, Wenjian/周文剑" wrote: > On 11/10/2015 10:50 AM, "Zhou, Wenjian/周文剑" wrote: >> On 11/10/2015 10:31 AM, Josh Stone wrote: >>> On 11/09/2015 06:10 PM, "Zhou, Wenjian/周文剑" wrote: >>>> To make sure nothing comes, we have to modify all cases which use the >>>> stap_run. I don't think it's a good idea that modifying the cases which >>>> are working well. >>> >>> If my probe-final-"EOF" idea works, then we can implement that entirely >>> in stap_run, without modifying any testcases. >>> >> >> Eh, if it works, I think the "{5}" won't be needed. >> But I doubt whether it will introduce errors to some cases. >> I will think more about it. >> > > It works, but also has some side effects. > It is better not to affect the cases which are working well, I think. What are those side effects?