This is the mail archive of the
systemtap@sourceware.org
mailing list for the systemtap project.
Re: container_of in systemtap scripts
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 20:55, Josh Stone <jistone@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 01/18/2010 07:04 AM, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
>> Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> writes:
>>> [...] Â@cast doesn't support that. Are there any other clean ways to
>>> write container_of() natively
>>
>> Actually it this sort of thing should work, since we have "&" operators:
>>
>> @cast($subfieldptr - (& @cast(0, "struct container")->subfield),
>> Â Â Â "struct container")
>>
>>> or are there plans to extend cast to include an offset?
>>
>> Sure, we can do something like that if needed.
>
> The hardest part of such things is deciding on the syntax. ÂCurrently it
> can be written:
>
> Â@cast(ptr, "type")
> Â@cast(ptr, "type", "module")
> Â@cast(ptr, "type", "<header>")
>
> I propose adding a qualifier on the type field, something like
> "type->field" or "type:field". ÂThe former is consistent with how fields
> are specified elsewhere, but it may imply more flexibility than a
> "container_of" can support. Â(e.g. "mystruct->foo->bar" could only work
> if there are no pointers in that chain.) ÂThe latter with a colon looks
> nice to me, but it introduces a new syntax.
My syntax proposal for container_of equivalent in stap is following one:
@cast(ptr, "type<-field"[, "module"])
Looks rather clear and also supports imaginable chaining. After all,
syntax is a secondary thing here.
Regards.
--
PrzemysÅaw PaweÅczyk