On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 11:46:55AM +0000, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 11:36:39AM +0000, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 04:13:32PM +0100, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
> > >   Hi,
> > > 
> > > > > TODO:
> > > > > Enabling modular tracepoints via -trace cmd line doesn't work yet.
> > > > > Guess we need to store the list somewhere for later re-processing.
> > > > > Error handling is tricky, specifically the "tracepoint doesn't exist"
> > > > > error.  Suggestions / ideas are welcome.
> > > > 
> > > > Two ideas:
> > > > 
> > > > Global trace event name list
> > > > ----------------------------
> > > > Build *some* global information about all trace events, including
> > > > modules, into the main QEMU binary. For example, generate an array of
> > > > all trace event names so QEMU can always print an error if a
> > > > non-existent trace event name is used. (This is similar to the
> > > > trace-events-all file, which is a global list of all trace events.)
> > > > 
> > > > Module name prefixes
> > > > --------------------
> > > > Allow an optional module/group prefix like qxl:my_trace_event. When the
> > > > user says:
> > > > 
> > > >   --trace qxl:my_trace_event
> > > > 
> > > > QEMU knows that this trace event belongs to the "qxl" module/group. It
> > > > will not attempt to load it until the qxl module registers itself.
> > > > 
> > > > If "my_trace_event" doesn't exist in the qxl module:
> > > > 1. If the qxl module is not loaded we don't hit an error. Nevermind.
> > > > 2. When the qxl module is loaded pending events are resolved and an
> > > >    error is printed.
> > > 
> > > Finally found the time to look at this again... 
> > > 
> > > So, we already have a "group".  Which is basically the sub-directory of
> > > the trace-events file right now, and it seems to be mostly a build system
> > > thing.  We get many small lists instead of one huge, but there seems to
> > > be no other effect.  We could change that though, by giving each group
> > > an (optional?) prefix.
> > 
> > Yes. This reminds me of an idea that was mentioned at the beginning of
> > this effort: maybe QEMU modules should always have their own directory
> > in the source tree instead of being alongside other source files that
> > are built into the main binary.
> 
> This implies that each time we modularize something, we have to move
> its source code. It is possible,  but it wouldn't be by preferred
> choice.

If it bothers you then it probably bothers others too. Let's leave it.

> > > There also is a probe prefix, apparently used by dtrace only.  Not sure
> > > how to deal with that.  It prefix is qemu-<target-type>-<target-name>.
> > > Giving qemu modules its own dtrace prefix looks sensible to me.  That
> > > would probably something like "qemu-module-<name>".
> > 
> > I think the DTrace prefix needs to be the same as the executable name,
> > but I'm not sure. I also don't know how that extends to shared libraries
> > like QEMU modules. I'm afraid you would need to investigate the DTrace
> > prefix.
> 
> I'm not aware of any requirement for dtrace prefix to match the
> executable name. We don't even have an executable called "qemu"
> so we're not matching even today.

Great, thanks for the other email reply where you showed how the
SystemTap tapsetsuse the prefix!

Stefan