On Thu, 7 Nov 2024 13:25:47 +0100
Marco Elver <[email protected]> wrote:
> +/**
> + * task_prctl_unknown - called on unknown prctl() option
> + * @task: pointer to the current task
> + * @option: option passed
> + * @arg2: arg2 passed
> + * @arg3: arg3 passed
> + * @arg4: arg4 passed
> + * @arg5: arg5 passed
> + *
> + * Called on an unknown prctl() option.
> + */
> +TRACE_EVENT(task_prctl_unknown,
> +
> + TP_PROTO(struct task_struct *task, int option, unsigned long arg2,
> unsigned long arg3,
> + unsigned long arg4, unsigned long arg5),
> +
> + TP_ARGS(task, option, arg2, arg3, arg4, arg5),
> +
> + TP_STRUCT__entry(
> + __string( comm, task->comm )
The question is, do we really need comm? From your example, it's redundant:
test-484 [000] ..... 631.748104: task_prctl_unknown: comm=test
option=1234 arg2=101 arg3=102 arg4=103 arg5=104
^^^^ ^^^^
-- Steve
> + __field( int, option)
> + __field( unsigned long, arg2)
> + __field( unsigned long, arg3)
> + __field( unsigned long, arg4)
> + __field( unsigned long, arg5)
> + ),
> +
> + TP_fast_assign(
> + __assign_str(comm);
> + __entry->option = option;
> + __entry->arg2 = arg2;
> + __entry->arg3 = arg3;
> + __entry->arg4 = arg4;
> + __entry->arg5 = arg5;
> + ),
> +
> + TP_printk("comm=%s option=%d arg2=%ld arg3=%ld arg4=%ld arg5=%ld",
> + __get_str(comm), __entry->option,
> + __entry->arg2, __entry->arg3, __entry->arg4, __entry->arg5)
> +);
> +
