This is the mail archive of the systemtap@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the systemtap project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
Hi - Vara wrote: > Last week i started discussion about tapsets, i am attaching some > more details. [...] As I understand it, your proposal consists of one possible standardized interface between the C code that the translator emits, and a library a tapset author may write. If so, then this scheme fits into the taxonomy from my other note, the following way. This is a special case of the "modified translator" extension path, since the translator itself needs to emit different C code, in order to call these tapset library routines. (Specifically, it would to know to associate that "sys_read_tapset_func1" function with the probe-point specification, and to call the associated extraction thingie.) The degree to which standardizing such an API is beneficial is a worthwhile question. One one hand, the tapset author would "own" both sides of the interface: both the translator changes that call the functions, and the functions themselves, so he can taylor-design each little bit. On the other hand, making similar subsequent tapsets is made simpler by duplicating an established pattern. - FChE
Attachment:
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |