> > On 23 May 2017, at 12:55, Victor Toso < victort...@redhat.com > wrote: >
> > On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 11:51:01AM +0200, Christophe Fergeau wrote: > > > > or something like glib (SPICE_XXX_DEBUG=alignment:foo:bar) > > > > > Just to point out that we have a bug for this [0] and IMHO it would be > > > the best approach but it would take some effort to have it besides the > > > glib that we would need is 2.50 (current required is 2.36) > > > [0] https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=91838 > These seems to suggest the usage of glib for more refined control. > Pavel also recently commented on having some trouble with --spice-debug and > SPICE_DEBUG and… Would be helpful if you had recap Pavel problems. I don't remember. > For what it’s worth, I’ve implemented in several of my own projects a low-key > tracing facility which for Spice would basically look like this: > https://github.com/c3d/spice-common/compare/cast-warnings...c3d:traces > https://github.com/c3d/spice-gtk/compare/cast-warnings...c3d:traces > Specifically: > - Define available traces in spice-traces.def file, e.g.: > // SPICE_TRACE(name, default_value, info) > SPICE_TRACE(foo, false, “Talk about foo") > SPICE_TRACE(bar, true, “A bar is a good thing, enabled by default") > #undef SPICE_TRACE > - Declare a structure holding one bit per trace flag, as follows: > extern struct spice_traces { > #define SPICE_TRACE(name, init, info) bool name:1; > #include “spice-traces.def” > } spice_traces; > - Initialize it in log.c, as follows: > struct spice_traces spice_traces = { > #define SPICE_TRACE(name, init, info) init, > #include “spice-traces.def" > }; > - In log.c, add a function to deal with passing trace options either from > command-line or environemnt > - In log.h, add macros to quickly test traces: > #define TRACE(name) (spice_traces.name) > #define IFTRACE(name) if (TRACE(name)) > #define spice_trace(name, …) IFTRACE(name) spice_debug(__VA_ARGS__) > - In spice-option.c, add code to deal with testing the options. > Would you find this useful? The most difficult part being to connect that to > existing tracing mechanisms to avoid replication of traces, while at the > same time ensuring that the existing enabling mechanisms work as before. > Christophe The main questions are: - what are the original problems exactly? - why your solution is good in your opinion? - did you try other options (like Marc-andre' suggested) ? Reading the code is not clear where exactly you implemented the different domains suggested by the bug report. Did you just coded SSL as an example? Also you introduced a new "TRACE" logging level; why DEBUG was not enough? Frediano
_______________________________________________ Spice-devel mailing list Spice-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel
