Hi Chen,
Do you plan on sending updates to address the comments that Masami and I have made? -- Steve On Thu, 14 May 2026 13:19:01 +0900 Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, 13 May 2026 12:40:17 -0400 > Steven Rostedt <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Tue, 12 May 2026 08:47:50 +0900 > > Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > On Fri, 8 May 2026 20:26:23 +0800 > > > Chen Jun <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > Low-level functions have many call paths, and sometimes > > > > we only care about the calls on a specific call path. > > > > Add a new filter to filter based on the call stack. > > > > > > > > Usage: > > > > 1. echo 'caller=="$function_name"' > events/../filter > > > > > > Thanks for interesting idea :) > > > > > > BTW, we already have "stacktrace". Since this actually checks > > > stacktrace, not caller, so I think we should reuse it. > > > Also, I think OP_GLOB is more suitable for this case. > > > (and more useful) > > > > Actually, it's not a stack trace, it's a function that is called from other > > functions. But since "caller" sounds like a direct called function (stack > > trace of the first instance), I think perhaps it should be "called_within" > > or > > something similar. :-/ > > Yeah, what about "callers"? > > > > > Also, OP_GLOB can't work because it only works for a single function. At > > the time of parsing, it finds the function (and should probably error out > > if there's more than one function with a given name). It then records the > > start and end address of the function so it only needs to find if one of > > the entries in the stack trace is between the start and end of the > > function. > > Ah, OK. It is just comparing address, not name. > > > > > I don't think this is possible with GLOB. We don't want to do a search of > > the functions when the event is triggered. > > Agreed. > > Thanks, > > > > > -- Steve > >
