Yes, that would be an option but I would rather avoid difficult searching thru application's library dependencies and specifying lot of libraries explicitly - for complex application this could be a really big amount.
Thanks, J > ------------ Původní zpráva ------------ > Od: Chad Mynhier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Předmět: Re: [dtrace-discuss] pid: excluding libraries, modules > Datum: 15.8.2008 14:04:25 > ---------------------------------------- > On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 3:21 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I am facing another problem with pid provider. I'd like to trace my > application but would like to not to trace libc and libnsl. I could use > predicate like /probemod != "libc" && probemod != "libnsl"/ but having this > dtrace keeps inserting probes into those libraries which causes considerable > hardware resources consumption. So I would probably need to exclude it in > probe > description but patterns in probe descption doesn't seem to allow me to do > what > I need. > > > > Does someone know any workaround or are there any plans for some improvement > in this area? I know I am now the only one who is experiencing this problem: > http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/dtrace-discuss/2005-November/000729.html > > Given you can't exclude these two libraries, another option is to > explicitly list the other libraries that you're interested in, or > simply your application if that's all that you care about. > > For example, instead of something like this, where you're wildcarding > probemod: > > pid$target:::entry > { > printf("Entered %s:%s\n", probemod, probefunc); > } > > do something like this: > > pid$target:a.out::entry, > pid$target:libfoo::entry, > pid$target:libbar::entry > { > printf("Entered %s:%s\n", probemod, probefunc); > } > > Chad > > > _______________________________________________ dtrace-discuss mailing list [email protected]
