Re: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v9 3/6] ethdev: add trace points for ethdev (part two)

[Ferruh Yigit]

On 2/8/2023 10:42 AM, Ankur Dwivedi wrote:
>>> +RTE_TRACE_POINT(
>>> +   rte_ethdev_trace_set_mc_addr_list,
>>> +   RTE_TRACE_POINT_ARGS(uint16_t port_id,
>>> +           const struct rte_ether_addr *mc_addr_set, uint32_t
>> nb_mc_addr,
>>> +           int ret),
>>> +   rte_trace_point_emit_u16(port_id);
>>> +   rte_trace_point_emit_ptr(mc_addr_set);
>> What about recording this as blob?
>> But 'mc_addr_set' is array of addresses, so length needs to be
>> 'RTE_ETHER_ADDR_LEN * nb_mc_addr'.
> The mc_addr_set pointer can be NULL in rte_eth_dev_set_mc_addr_list. In that 
> case the
> blob function will give seg fault. Hence I think blob cannot be used here.
Does it make sense to make 'rte_trace_point_emit_blob()' accept NULL and
fill all array with 0 in that case to cover this kind of cases?