From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Avi Kivity Subject: Re: trace_printk() support in trace-cmd Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2010 16:37:34 +0200 Message-ID: <4CEBD1AE.7000203@redhat.com> References: <4CE16941.3080008@redhat.com> <1289920433.30543.5.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> <4CEB9FCE.9020108@redhat.com> <1290522640.30543.306.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: linux-trace-users@vger.kernel.org, KVM list To: Steven Rostedt Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1290522640.30543.306.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> Sender: linux-trace-users-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On 11/23/2010 04:30 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Tue, 2010-11-23 at 13:04 +0200, Avi Kivity wrote: > > On 11/16/2010 05:13 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > > BTW, what does /debug/tracing/printk_formats show? > > > > > > > Empty. > > > > So you have real trace_printk's not bprintk's? > What are bprintk()s? > That is, if the format is not a const, then we fall back to > __trace_printk(_THIS_IP_, fmt, args); > > And this is a different object. I have not tested these in a while, I'll > give it a try. > > But if your printks are bprintks, then the bug is in the kernel, since > that printk_formats needs to show something. What I do is sprinkle trace_printk()s around my code and expect to see them interspersed with enabled tracepoints in 'trace-cmd report'. Is that not the intended behaviour? -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function