public inbox for systemtap@sourceware.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "fche at redhat dot com" <sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org>
To: systemtap@sourceware.org
Subject: [Bug translator/20394] inconsistency in exe/library paths searching between @cast() and process.library.function probes
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2016 15:06:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-20394-6586-X6UKJOe5lt@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-20394-6586@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20394

Frank Ch. Eigler <fche at redhat dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |fche at redhat dot com

--- Comment #1 from Frank Ch. Eigler <fche at redhat dot com> ---
Having a search path in @cast in a function() makes it possible that a mismatch
will exist between the probe (whose $context variable is being passed) and the
@cast (who interprets that pointer).  What you seem to really want is to make
@cast() in a function refer to - match - the context of the probe that invoked
it.  This is kind of what we do already for @cast()s in probe handler bodies.

It's as though we want to specialize the functions invoked from a probe handler
by the probe handler, almost as if they were inlined.  Then syntactic elements
inside the functions (even $vars) could conceivably be resolved in the context
of each probe where those functions are actually called from.

What do you think?

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

  reply	other threads:[~2016-07-21 15:06 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-07-21 14:55 [Bug translator/20394] New: " dsmith at redhat dot com
2016-07-21 15:06 ` fche at redhat dot com [this message]
2016-07-21 15:50 ` [Bug translator/20394] " dsmith at redhat dot com
2020-04-24 20:26 ` fche 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=bug-20394-6586-X6UKJOe5lt@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/ \
    --to=sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org \
    --cc=systemtap@sourceware.org \
    /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).