From: Jerin Jacob <jerinjacobk@gmail.com>
To: "Morten Brørup" <mb@smartsharesystems.com>
Cc: Jerin Jacob <jerinj@marvell.com>,
Sunil Kumar Kori <skori@marvell.com>,
dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] eal: add build-time option to omit trace
Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2024 21:36:27 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CALBAE1O3vFACO8UetWiCNdL8iAGLVscys_ZL7fDPyspGQKe-mw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35E9F74D@smartserver.smartshare.dk>
On Tue, Oct 1, 2024 at 9:32 PM Morten Brørup <mb@smartsharesystems.com> wrote:
>
> > From: Jerin Jacob [mailto:jerinjacobk@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, 1 October 2024 17.02
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 1, 2024 at 7:44 PM Morten Brørup <mb@smartsharesystems.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > From: Jerin Jacob [mailto:jerinjacobk@gmail.com]
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, 1 October 2024 16.05
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Oct 1, 2024 at 7:19 PM Morten Brørup
> > <mb@smartsharesystems.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Jerin,
> > > > >
> > > > > If you have no further comments, please add review/ack tag, to
> > help
> > > > Thomas see that the patch has been accepted by the maintainer, and
> > can
> > > > be merged.
> > > >
> > > > There was a comment to make the function as rte_trace_is_enabled()
> > and
> > > > remove internal. The rest looks good to me. I will Ack in the next
> > > > version.
> > >
> > > Perhaps my reply to that comment was unclear... such a public
> > function already exists in the previous API:
> >
> > I see. It was not clear.
> >
> > >
> > https://elixir.bootlin.com/dpdk/v24.07/source/lib/eal/include/rte_trace
> > .h#L36
> > >
> > > That function tells if trace enabled at both build time and runtime,
> > and returns false if not.
> > >
> > > A separate public function to tell if trace is enabled at build time
> > seems like overkill to me. Is that what you are asking for?
> >
> > No. Just use rte_trace_is_enabled() in app/test instead of
> > __rte_trace_point_generic_is_enabled() as it is internal.
>
> Just tested it, and it didn't have the wanted effect.
> I think rte_trace_is_enabled() returns false until at least one tracepoint has been enabled, which seems like a good optimization.
> But it also means that we cannot use it to replace __rte_trace_point_generic_is_enabled() in test/app, because no tracepoints have been enabled at this point of execution, so it returns false here.
>
> I looked around in the code, and cannot find a method without looking at internals, or duplicating a test case.
>
> I could test if rte_trace_point_lookup("app.dpdk.test.tp") returns non-NULL, but that would duplicate the same test in test_trace_points_lookup().
>
> What do you think...
> Keep using internal function __rte_trace_point_generic_is_enabled(),
> test rte_trace_point_lookup("app.dpdk.test.tp") != NULL,
> or any other idea?
How about the following, it is anyway the correct thing to do
bool
rte_trace_is_enabled(void)
{
+ if (__rte_trace_point_generic_is_enabled() == false)
+ return false;
return rte_atomic_load_explicit(&trace.status,
rte_memory_order_acquire) != 0;
}
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-10-01 16:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-09-18 8:55 [PATCH] " Morten Brørup
2024-09-18 9:49 ` Jerin Jacob
2024-09-18 10:23 ` Morten Brørup
2024-09-19 8:06 ` [PATCH v2] " Morten Brørup
2024-09-19 8:51 ` Jerin Jacob
2024-09-19 13:15 ` Morten Brørup
2024-09-19 13:54 ` Jerin Jacob
2024-09-19 15:35 ` Morten Brørup
2024-09-19 15:49 ` Jerin Jacob
2024-09-19 16:08 ` Morten Brørup
2024-09-19 16:34 ` Jerin Jacob
2024-09-20 9:08 ` [PATCH v3] " Morten Brørup
2024-09-23 8:39 ` Jerin Jacob
2024-09-24 13:50 ` Morten Brørup
2024-09-24 13:39 ` [PATCH v4] " Morten Brørup
2024-09-24 15:30 ` Stephen Hemminger
2024-09-24 15:41 ` Jerin Jacob
2024-09-24 15:53 ` Morten Brørup
2024-09-24 15:57 ` Jerin Jacob
2024-10-01 13:49 ` Morten Brørup
2024-10-01 14:05 ` Jerin Jacob
2024-10-01 14:14 ` Morten Brørup
2024-10-01 15:01 ` Jerin Jacob
2024-10-01 16:01 ` Morten Brørup
2024-10-01 16:06 ` Jerin Jacob [this message]
2024-10-01 16:15 ` Morten Brørup
2024-10-02 16:17 ` Jerin Jacob
2024-10-06 12:58 ` Morten Brørup
2024-10-06 12:38 ` [PATCH v5] " Morten Brørup
2024-10-06 13:58 ` [PATCH v6] " Morten Brørup
2024-10-07 5:45 ` Jerin Jacob
2024-10-07 6:07 ` Morten Brørup
2024-10-06 14:03 ` [PATCH v7] " Morten Brørup
2024-10-06 14:09 ` Morten Brørup
2024-10-07 11:46 ` [PATCH v9] " Morten Brørup
2024-10-08 7:16 ` Morten Brørup
2024-10-08 10:15 ` David Marchand
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CALBAE1O3vFACO8UetWiCNdL8iAGLVscys_ZL7fDPyspGQKe-mw@mail.gmail.com \
--to=jerinjacobk@gmail.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=jerinj@marvell.com \
--cc=mb@smartsharesystems.com \
--cc=skori@marvell.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).