This is the mail archive of the systemtap@sourceware.org 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]

Re: Order "begin" probes are run

From: Li Guanglei <guanglei at cn dot ibm dot com>
To: "Stone, Joshua I" <joshua dot i dot stone at intel dot com>
Cc: "Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche at redhat dot com>, Mike Mason <mmlnx at us dot ibm dot com>, systemtap at sources dot redhat dot com
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2006 09:32:09 +0800
Subject: Re: Order "begin" probes are run
Organization: IBM CSTL
References: <C56DB814FAA30B418C75310AC4BB279D010A6B6F@scsmsx413.amr.corp.intel.com>

Stone, Joshua I wrote:

This is now implemented -- you can give a numeric parameter to begin/end
probes, and they will execute in increasing order.  The sequence number
if left out is effectively zero.

We should adopt a convention for tapset writers to use these fields.  My
suggestion: when it doesn't matter, just use begin/end without a
parameter; to run early, use less than -1000; and to run late use
greater than 1000.  This way script writers still have +/- 1000 to play
with locally.

Josh

Sorry for the late response. This is really a useful feature for LKET since LKET will perform some initialization work and without this feature it's hard to control the running order of begin probes.

- Guanglei

References:
- RE: Order "begin" probes are run
  - From: Stone, Joshua I

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]