[Apologies for the late reply: I'm randomly going through my backlog]
Brad Chapman writes:
> Mr. Gooch,
>
> --- Richard Gooch <rgooch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Brad Chapman writes:
> > > I just got an idea: why don't we implement a userspace trace level
> > > system for devfsd with macro'd levels like the following:
> > >
> > > /* Basic trace levels */
> > > #define TRACE_LEVEL_ZERO 0 /* None */
> > > #define TRACE_LEVEL_SPECIFIED 1 /* Specified on the command
> > > line */
> > > #define TRACE_LEVEL_SIGNALS 2 /* Trapped and caught signals
> > > */
> > > #define TRACE_LEVEL_PROCESS_FORK 3 /* Process forks for MODLOAD and
> > > EXECUTE */
> > > #define TRACE_LEVEL_SERVICE_LOOP 4 /* devfs event service loops */
> > > #define TRACE_LEVEL_CONFIG 5 /* devfsd configuration */
> > > #define TRACE_LEVEL_KERNEL 6 /* Kernel-passed information
> > > */
> > >
> > > /* Debugging trace levels */
> > > #define TRACE_LEVEL_DEBUGGING 7 /* Basic debugging */
> > > #define TRACE_LEVEL_KERNEL_DBG 8 /* Kernel-passed information
> > > debugging */
> > > #define TRACE_LEVEL_CONFIG_DBG 9 /* Configuration debugging */
> > > #define TRACE_LEVEL_COMPAT_NAME_DBG 10 /* Compatiblity name
> > > debugging */
> > > #define TRACE_LEVEL_EXPRESSION_DBG 11 /* Regular expression
> > > debugging */
> > >
> > > Does anyone think this is a good idea?
> >
> > It's not clear to me what some of these trace levels are, nor what is
> > to be done with them. What is it you are trying to do, anyway?
>
> I'm trying to create a sort of tracing system where you can
> specify a mask on the command line (or a simple integer) and get a
> vareity of traced information about what devfsd is doing. The stuff
> I printed above was just an example of an incremental trace level
> system.
It's making things more complex than I'm happy with. I don't want the
code riddled with more debugging output.
> > Also note that I'm not keen on adding code to the core of devfsd
> > unless necessary. So I'd look more favourably on an extension.
>
> Extension? What sort of extension? How would you extend
> devfsd's tracing subsystem without actually modifying the core code?
> IDGT.....
I was thinking that if you wanted to capture and log events, you could
call into a special extension which could pull apart the event
structure and show all the information you wanted. That would give you
a lot of tracing information. It wouldn't give you all the information
about the internal workings of devfsd, but:
- there a fair bit of that already
- I'm not happy with increasing it.
Regards,
Richard....
Permanent: rgooch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Current: rgooch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|