Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 22 Mar 2010 09:01:43 -0600
From:      Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org>
To:        John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>, Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@leidinger.net>
Cc:        "Robert N. M. Watson" <rwatson@freebsd.org>, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: CTF patch for testing/review (was: Re: is dtrace usable?)
Message-ID:  <33755363-49D9-46C4-9EEC-2951ED263C86@samsco.org>
In-Reply-To: <8E9F405D-0140-4C67-B7BD-94714E2DD109@samsco.org>
References:  <E1Nnv0H-00020A-9M@kabab.cs.huji.ac.il> <201003100812.29749.jhb@freebsd.org> <20100322123408.16671ijbvmcyux80@webmail.leidinger.net> <201003220941.10525.jhb@freebsd.org> <8E9F405D-0140-4C67-B7BD-94714E2DD109@samsco.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Actually, I'll withdraw my patch, I like Alexander's better, with the =
exception that CTF should be opt-in, not opt-out.

Scott

On Mar 22, 2010, at 8:55 AM, Scott Long wrote:

> On Mar 22, 2010, at 7:41 AM, John Baldwin wrote:
>> On Monday 22 March 2010 7:34:08 am Alexander Leidinger wrote:
>>> Redirecting from stable@ to arch@...
>>>=20
>>> Quoting John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> (from Wed, 10 Mar 2010 =
08:12:29=20
>> -0500):
>>>=20
>>>> On Wednesday 10 March 2010 5:34:22 am Alexander Leidinger wrote:
>>>>> Quoting "Robert N. M. Watson" <rwatson@freebsd.org> (from Tue, 9 =
Mar
>>>>> 2010 16:39:09 +0000):
>>>>>=20
>>>>>>=20
>>>>>> On Mar 9, 2010, at 2:16 PM, Alexander Leidinger wrote:
>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>> =46rom this you can see that sys.mk is included and parsed =
before
>>>> 'Makefile',
>>>>>>>> so the WITH_CTF=3Dyes is not set until after sys.mk has been =
parsed.
>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>> I think we need to find a different solution for this. The need =
to
>>>>>>> specify WITH_CTF at the command line is very error prone. :(
>>>>>>=20
>>>>>> You are neither the first person to have made this observation, =
nor
>>>>>> the first person to have failed to propose a solution in the form =
of
>>>>>> a patch :-).
>>>=20
>>> Ok, here is the proposal in form of a patch. :-)
>>>    http://www.leidinger.net/test/ctf.diff
>>>=20
>>>> Unfortunately the ctf stuff breaks static binaries.  I think that =
if =20
>>>> that were
>>>> fixed we would simply enable it by default and be done.
>>>=20
>>> The patch is:
>>> - enabling CTF stuff by default for the kernel
>>> - allows to disable the CTF stuff for the kernel by defining NO_CTF
>>> - *not* enabling the CTF stuff by default for libs and progs
>>>   (if someone tells me how to distinguish the build for static
>>>   stuff from dynamic stuff, I can have a look to enable it for
>>>   the dynamic case)
>>> - allows to enable the CTF stuff for the userland by defining
>>>   WITH_CTF as before
>>=20
>> I think this patch looks very interesting.  I think in some ways it =
would be=20
>> nice to make CTF "opt-in" though instead of "opt-out".  I think the =
current=20
>> patch would enable CTF when building ports, for example.   I think =
instead it=20
>> should default to not building CTF, but require an ENABLE_CTF =
(instead of=20
>> NO_CTF) to be set, and set that in bsd.kern.mk if WITH_CTF is =
defined.
>>=20
>=20
> I have a patch at Yahoo that makes WITH_CTF settable from the kernel =
config file, thus making it opt-in.  I'd prefer this as well to opt-out. =
 Give me a little bit to dig it up and polish it for review.
>=20
> Scott
>=20
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-arch@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to =
"freebsd-arch-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?33755363-49D9-46C4-9EEC-2951ED263C86>