在 2026/5/29 22:38, Steven Rostedt 写道: > > Hi Chen, > > Do you plan on sending updates to address the comments that Masami and > I have made? > > -- Steve
Hi， Sorry, I've been busy with other things lately. I'll release the patch v2 next week. One thing I'd like to confirm is whether to use `called_within` as the filter name. Thanks -- Chen Jun > > > 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 >> >> > > >
