From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 709DE46259; Tue, 18 Feb 2025 15:28:25 +0100 (CET) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C571402C4; Tue, 18 Feb 2025 15:28:25 +0100 (CET) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08D0A402A0 for ; Tue, 18 Feb 2025 15:28:23 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1739888903; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=02yLjW+nxJ9RciE4kxxSTnvTzXa81YrEz71k13TC1Fk=; b=EjK6o+3LREKaSSO6Gu89P44hfVZl0LVGZuPFHAhjNzEJWmj2LOLZ6hUxIURCcq2AL6x0Sv OUixKFqI4lScg3qqiYJOiForerQL1vYCCGMVatspfQOUcGIrkxDiNrvoO50rXdBUt8z1CJ 6XnaF9LBfYqNsiMNYtYAU8/pLqeAGrQ= Received: from mail-lj1-f197.google.com (mail-lj1-f197.google.com [209.85.208.197]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-628-2Tw8_DtGPS2OkHs3fFxM9g-1; Tue, 18 Feb 2025 09:28:21 -0500 X-MC-Unique: 2Tw8_DtGPS2OkHs3fFxM9g-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: 2Tw8_DtGPS2OkHs3fFxM9g_1739888900 Received: by mail-lj1-f197.google.com with SMTP id 38308e7fff4ca-3091fb0f087so23267051fa.2 for ; Tue, 18 Feb 2025 06:28:21 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1739888900; x=1740493700; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=02yLjW+nxJ9RciE4kxxSTnvTzXa81YrEz71k13TC1Fk=; b=geHnB+4SZAR7+DYQW/Rk5ouhmXG2AdwQyPwt4yZgbFMAlbUoWhNGu2h5GArOfbidtn 4KK4Gr6RPyrJiZuAWGaNkvBlv9Ss8nl4PWSqsK0Vv77LoZUAxD56CwAQbbmZL38IGSXD VX3LukQ+s5cHF1J0OIxNEH/sBs1kr5HgLsl2O+eqRMaqu+fRopyZO/cGZ2I8FY7AZ7L7 O3ZuaLVe6aU2TmlpX0h4InDiDzF1nnrLVZSI4w1NaB3H54yIaLQWaQlBSPyIPhbHAFqZ iDDftwU9lUw5fZ8vE1hG8MudYFHZZ5O7v44WZBDFo8KdiN0AE0FGANharlzG45YLTDYE 11MA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyOHoiOYntwum5LXTUUH3DVAo6liHCOj4681CNy4nGbFJ3sqRj0 GUeLpnzkXVReMGwchkBHduAUM8NPubeUsK7ogJ+Sa0zaLroozTvyQVpGfqZ7tLgfNuBI/QMAgEA EJawP68UHsqGZ7oP7lrHkLO6/y161T5sFPOB7NIzQkIR7/JrtWV8RbjTXKPdLRwS72Mgbo5N7Sn XjHekk2rH0PZer2YQ= X-Gm-Gg: ASbGnctyQqF60XTx26cGsDXHilJgscLhkmFegfKhTV/D+As5/rBsfohdlCSbgj2Ohhy 7vFftZNh7SxDc403yabnbPBtvBdY6znV0PtmBPeFGDxyAQTnvjZDPUyxbV6rANlon X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:6ce:b0:540:3561:969d with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-5452fe8f8b0mr5331067e87.49.1739888900354; Tue, 18 Feb 2025 06:28:20 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEbI9oaRiDXmKq/9fpijc9jK7moL8n1fKX9dMQHq/z0fDgT1Ube8WieMNtQmJxCQFhw2KpmdnJ9oXfBpNZIcfU= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:6ce:b0:540:3561:969d with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-5452fe8f8b0mr5331051e87.49.1739888899922; Tue, 18 Feb 2025 06:28:19 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20250124161408.310581-1-david.marchand@redhat.com> <20250210174424.3364021-1-david.marchand@redhat.com> <20250210174424.3364021-5-david.marchand@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: From: David Marchand Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2025 15:28:07 +0100 X-Gm-Features: AWEUYZm006tbbg4ICZ6BXrMBec6OvXU8qxXgkz4AS3c3Vx9Fslmc8sR5iw2KvoU Message-ID: Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] [PATCH v3 4/6] trace: support dumping binary inside a struct To: Sunil Kumar Kori , Jerin Jacob Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" , "fengchengwen@huawei.com" , Kevin Laatz , Bruce Richardson , Tyler Retzlaff X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-MFC-PROC-ID: AsvMQndhhg9q9T4wY7UjrGv7UCrgX3rRhYH8gN9Tj7E_1739888900 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org On Wed, Feb 12, 2025 at 6:14=E2=80=AFAM Sunil Kumar Kori wrote: > > > On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 9:53=E2=80=AFAM Sunil Kumar Kori > > wrote: > > > > > > > diff --git a/lib/eal/common/eal_common_trace_ctf.c > > > > b/lib/eal/common/eal_common_trace_ctf.c > > > > index 6bc8bb9036..d9b307e076 100644 > > > > --- a/lib/eal/common/eal_common_trace_ctf.c > > > > +++ b/lib/eal/common/eal_common_trace_ctf.c > > > > @@ -378,6 +378,9 @@ char *trace_metadata_fixup_field(const char > > *field) > > > > "->", > > > > "*", > > > > " ", > > > > + "&", > > > > + "(", > > > > + ")", > > > Adding brackets makes token names a bit complex. Same name is used in > > > metadata file to dump the traces to the user. With this complex name, > > > user might not understand the purpose of that information. > > > > > > For example, _conf_src_port_pcie_sizeof_uint64_t_ is created in > > > metafile and same will be dumped. But with this User might not get th= at > > which information is provided. > > > > In practice, as there is no other documentation for a trace point argum= ents, a > > user needs to read the trace point definitions. > > So it seems trivial to me to link a variable name in the trace point em= itter, and > > the metadata in the trace files. > > > > > > > > This is the reason; we followed the existing naming convention which = is user > > friendly. > > > > User friendly? I don't see how this is different with '.' and '->'. > In general, structure fields are given a proper name to represent the pur= pose. > When we use it directly in trace point using '.' or '->' then it remains = a meaningful name. > Adding more tokens in name, is making them complex and deviating from the= re meaning. > > I am not saying that the mentioned support should not be there. I am just= trying to convey > that If it is possible to make meaningful names, then that will be more h= elpful. Hard to preserve such information given the limitations of the C parser (which seems to apply to the CTF format). I still think that interpretation of the metadata in the traces require looking at the source code, which means that the "readability" objection is weak. Jerin, opinion please. --=20 David Marchand