On 6/20/19 10:53 AM, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote: > On 6/20/19 7:50 AM, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: >> On 17/06/2019 14:56, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote: >>> On 6/17/19 3:25 AM, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: >>>> On 14/06/2019 19:33, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote: >>>>> On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 10:13:04AM +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 13/06/2019 23:08, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote: >>>>>>> Hi Alexey, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 6/13/19 7:09 AM, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: >>>>>>>> This adds a trace point which prints every loaded image. This includes >>>>>>>> bios/firmware/kernel/initradmdisk/pcirom. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Alexey Kardashevskiy <a...@ozlabs.ru> >>>>>>>> --- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The example for a pseries guest: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> loader_write_rom slof.bin: @0x0 size=0xe22e0 ROM=0 >>>>>>>> loader_write_rom phdr #0: /home/aik/t/vml4120le: @0x400000 >>>>>>>> size=0x13df000 ROM=0 >>>>>>>> loader_write_rom /home/aik/t/le.cpio: @0x1ad0000 size=0x9463a00 ROM=0 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I find the "ROM=0" part confuse, maybe you can change to "ROM:false". >>>>>> >>>>>> How? I mean I can do that in the code as rom->isrom?"true":"false" and >>>>>> make trace point accept "%s" but it is quite ugly and others seem to >>>>>> just use %d for bool. >>>>> >>>>> Yes, %d is the convention for bool. Perhaps you can name it "is_rom" >>>>> instead of "ROM". That way the name communicates that this is a boolean >>>>> value. >>>> >>>> It is quite obvious though that it is boolean even as "ROM" (what else >>>> can that be realistically?) and there does not seem to be a convention >>>> about xxx:N vs is_xxx:N. And personally I find longer lines worse for >>>> limited width screens (I run multiple qemus in tiled tmux). Whose tree >>>> is this going to? Let's ask that person :) >>> >>> Personally I find 'is_rom' clearer. I read 2 addresses, then my first >>> reaction was to parse it as another address. But it is also true we now >>> enforce traced hex values with '0x' prefix, so your 'ROM' is unlikely an >>> address. Tiled tmux is an acceptable argument. Anyway you already got my >>> R-b. >>> >>> Tree: the PPC tree is likely to get it merged quicker than the MISC tree. >> >> >> There is nothing specific about PPC though so I guess it is the MISC >> tree, who does maintain that? > > Paolo, Cc'ing him.
Stefan sometime takes tracing patches, but this patch might also go via Trivial@ (Cc'ed).
