Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2013 23:20:51 +0200 From: Andriy Gapon <avg@FreeBSD.org> To: Mark Johnston <markj@FreeBSD.org> Cc: dtrace@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: "unstable" sdt probes Message-ID: <527026B3.2070309@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20131026180643.GA98676@raichu> References: <5268F461.7080504@FreeBSD.org> <20131024161620.GA1710@charmander> <526A9CB5.2050207@FreeBSD.org> <20131026180643.GA98676@raichu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
on 26/10/2013 21:06 Mark Johnston said the following: > The patch here is what I had in mind: > http://people.freebsd.org/~markj/patches/zfs_probes.diff > > I've only compile-tested it, but it should create illumos-compatible ZFS > probes without changing any ZFS code, assuming I understand exactly how > they're creating/naming probes. :) The simplicity and straightforwardness of your patch is very seducing! :-) I think that you missed sys/cddl/compat/opensolaris/sys/sdt.h, but that's a very a minor issue that is trivial to fix. I had something a little bit more elaborate on my mind. Something that would allow DTRACE_PROBE macros to work without providing any additional code per each probe. And also something that would make DTRACE_PROBE macros appealing to use in the FreeBSD code proper. So, I got some time to hack on this and here is a result: http://people.freebsd.org/~avg/dtrace-probe-macros.diff This change depends upon another change that I've just posted. So, no surprise that I feel preference for my change, but I think that your change has certain advantage as well (esp. brevity and clarity). What do you think? Thank you! -- Andriy Gapon
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?527026B3.2070309>