qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH for-5.1] tracetool: carefully define SDT_USE_VARIADIC


From: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
Subject: Re: [PATCH for-5.1] tracetool: carefully define SDT_USE_VARIADIC
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2020 18:16:48 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.5.0

On 7/29/20 5:39 PM, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> The dtrace backend defines SDT_USE_VARIADIC as a workaround for a
> conflict with a LTTng UST header file, which requires SDT_USE_VARIADIC
> to be defined.
> 
> LTTng UST <lttng/tracepoint.h> breaks if included after generated dtrace
> headers because SDT_USE_VARIADIC will already be defined:
> 
>   #ifdef LTTNG_UST_HAVE_SDT_INTEGRATION
>   #define SDT_USE_VARIADIC <-- error, it's already defined
>   #include <sys/sdt.h>
> 
> Be more careful when defining SDT_USE_VARIADIC. This fixes the build
> when both the dtrace and ust tracers are enabled at the same time.
> 
> Fixes: 27e08bab94f7c6ebe0b75938c98c394c969e3fd8 ("tracetool: work around ust 
> <sys/sdt.h> include conflict")
> Signed-off-by: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>
> ---
>  scripts/tracetool/backend/dtrace.py | 4 ++++
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/scripts/tracetool/backend/dtrace.py 
> b/scripts/tracetool/backend/dtrace.py
> index b7fe4c1b50..fc0c8fc52f 100644
> --- a/scripts/tracetool/backend/dtrace.py
> +++ b/scripts/tracetool/backend/dtrace.py
> @@ -44,11 +44,15 @@ def generate_h_begin(events, group):
>      # require SDT_USE_VARIADIC to be defined. If dtrace includes <sys/sdt.h>
>      # first without defining SDT_USE_VARIADIC then ust breaks because the
>      # STAP_PROBEV() macro is not defined.
> +    out('#ifndef SDT_USE_VARIADIC')
>      out('#define SDT_USE_VARIADIC 1')
> +    out('#endif')
>  
>      out('#include "%s"' % header,
>          '')
>  
> +    out('#undef SDT_USE_VARIADIC')
> +
>      # SystemTap defines <provider>_<name>_ENABLED() but other DTrace
>      # implementations might not.
>      for e in events:
> 

Reviewed-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@redhat.com>




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]