Re: [PATCH] tracing: Add disable-filter-buf option

[Mathieu Desnoyers]

On 2023-12-15 12:04, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Dec 2023 10:53:39 -0500
> Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
[...]
> > So rather than stacking tons of "on/off" switches for filter
> > features, how about you let users express the mechanism they
> > want to use for filtering with a string instead ? e.g.
> >
> > filter-method="temp-buffer"
> > filter-method="ring-buffer"
> > filter-method="input-arguments"
>
> If I add other ways to filter, it will be a separate file to control
> that, but all options are on/off switches. Even if I add other
> functionality to the way buffers are created, this will still have the
> same functionality to turn the entire thing on or off.

I'll be clearer then: I think this is a bad ABI. In your reply, you justify
this bad ABI by implementation motivations.

I don't care about the implementation, I care about the ABI, and
I feel that your reply is not addressing my concern at all.

Moreover, double-negative boolean options (disable-X=false) are confusing.

Thanks,

Mathieu

--
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
https://www.efficios.com