Re: [PATCH 3/3] tracing/probes: Fix return value when "(fault)" is injected

[Google]

On Thu, 6 Jul 2023 23:06:42 -0400
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Fri, 7 Jul 2023 11:51:28 +0900
> Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > Ah, I meant that your commit 2e9906f84fc7 ("tracing: Add "(fault)" name injection
> >  to kernel probes") tries to make it '"(fault)"', So it makes 
> > 
> >        trace-cmd-4688    [000] ...1. 466968.015879: myopen: (syscalls.sys_enter_openat) file="(fault)"
> > 
> > Keeping it current '(fault)' makes easy to identify which one is failed to fetch,
> > but it may require user to parse both "some string" and (fault). I thought that
> > was the reason why you added that commit.
> 
> Hmm, That commit didn't explicitly add the double quotes. That may just
> have been a side effect of passing back the string?
> 
> But I agree, just (fault) instead of "(fault)" is more explicit that it
> faulted.

OK, let me revert that commit and clarify what the data_loc data should be
with fault case.

Thank you,

> 
> -- Steve


-- 
Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@xxxxxxxxxx>