- Use SDT_PROBE<N>() instead of SDT_PROBE(). This has no functional effect
at the moment, but will be needed for some future changes.
- Don't hardcode the module component of the probe identifier. This is
set automatically by the SDT framework.
MFC after: 1 week
SDT_PROBE requires 5 parameters whereas SDT_PROBE<n> requires n parameters
where n is typically smaller than 5.
Perhaps SDT_PROBE should be made a private implementation detail.
MFC after: 20 days
In its stead use the Solaris / illumos approach of emulating '-' (dash)
in probe names with '__' (two consecutive underscores).
Reviewed by: markj
MFC after: 3 weeks
- DTrace scripts to check for errors, performance, ...
they serve mostly as examples of what you can do with the static probe;s
with moderate load the scripts may be overwhelmed, excessive lock-tracing
may influence program behavior (see the last design decission)
Design decissions:
- use "linuxulator" as the provider for the native bitsize; add the
bitsize for the non-native emulation (e.g. "linuxuator32" on amd64)
- Add probes only for locks which are acquired in one function and released
in another function. Locks which are aquired and released in the same
function should be easy to pair in the code, inter-function
locking is more easy to verify in DTrace.
- Probes for locks should be fired after locking and before releasing to
prevent races (to provide data/function stability in DTrace, see the
man-page of "dtrace -v ..." and the corresponding DTrace docs).
