From owner-svn-src-projects@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jan 14 19:58:36 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-projects@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [8.8.178.115]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A74635C; Mon, 14 Jan 2013 19:58:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bright@mu.org) Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C469874C; Mon, 14 Jan 2013 19:58:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from Alfreds-MacBook-Pro-9.local (unknown [64.25.27.130]) by elvis.mu.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9462A1A3CE7; Mon, 14 Jan 2013 11:58:31 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <50F4635F.9010101@mu.org> Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 14:58:23 -0500 From: Alfred Perlstein User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: John Baldwin Subject: Re: svn commit: r245259 - projects/utrace2 References: <201301101758.r0AHw6m7078896@svn.freebsd.org> <201301141240.58356.jhb@freebsd.org> <50F4520C.50500@mu.org> <201301141401.46622.jhb@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <201301141401.46622.jhb@freebsd.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: svn-src-projects@freebsd.org, Alfred Perlstein , src-committers@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: svn-src-projects@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "SVN commit messages for the src " projects" tree" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 19:58:36 -0000 On 1/14/13 2:01 PM, John Baldwin wrote: > On Monday, January 14, 2013 1:44:28 pm Alfred Perlstein wrote: >> I think we are basically in agreement, however we differ on the following two points, whereas now I think we only differ on a single point. >> >> 1) belief that a 4 character string signature is superior to a protocol/version tuple. >> >> After looking at the code and thinking about this quite a bit, I agree with you that string based namespace is nicer, however I think we need the > following changes: >> a) define the system namespace to have "_" preceding the trace name. so RTLD -> _RTL >> b) or maybe we need another few characters? 6 or 8 so that it can still be nice. so "_RTL" -> "_RTLD\0\0\0", "_MALLOC\0" >> c) we add a version field after the character string. >> d) we create a mechanism for requesting a utrace allocation namespace somewhere (/usr/share/utrace/allocations.txt) where vendors can allocate > strings. >> 2) you believe that filtering this all through utrace(2) is OK. I would prefer that we leave utrace(2) alone and move forward with utrace2(2) to > leave behind all the unformatted data we used to have. I would like to leave utrace(2) in the system and add utrace2(2) for new consumers. >> What do you think? >> >> My end goal is to make this something that more users can grab and use for a quick and handy debug tool and to actually build on this somewhat, > (libutrace) what we have now (unstructured globs of whatever) does not work. > > I disagree with this last assertion. On what basis do you claim that what we > have now does not work? Do you have any specific examples besides > hypothetical cases? I fail to see how utrace() in its current form is not > already useful, and I've yet to see a convincing argument from you that it is > not. > #include #include int main(void) { void *ptr = 0x52544c44; realloc(ptr, 200); } -Alfred