Subject: Re: ktr from freebsd
To: Andrey Petrov <email@example.com>
From: Bill Studenmund <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 04/23/2004 16:47:33
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Thu, Apr 22, 2004 at 08:11:37PM -0700, Andrey Petrov wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 23, 2004 at 07:56:41AM +0900, enami tsugutomo wrote:
> > > , uvm_history seems closest by functionality but too tied to uvm and
> > > somewhat too heavy for .S codes.
> > The latter is true but former is not. I'm curious why do you think
> Have to agree 'too tied' is overstatement, I looked at uvmhist _after_
> I started using ktr so things like multiple buffers, explicit initializat=
> strlens and UVMHIST_FUNC presets looked excessive for what I need.
I don't think it's excessive. It's great for the time when you need just a=
little bit more than what you have now.
Multiple buffers are so that different subsystems can log or not log as=20
they see fit. UVMHIST_FUNC lets you name what routine the events come=20
from. I agree you pretty much always want the name of the routine,so=20
__FUNCTION__ would have been fine..
The strlens seemed weird for me at first. But they make sense when you=20
remember that the history's dumped by a libkvm-using program in userland.=
By having explicit lengths, extracting data from the kernel is much more=20
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (NetBSD)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----