On Mon, Feb 01, 2021 at 07:13:27PM +0100, BALATON Zoltan wrote: > On Mon, 1 Feb 2021, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 01, 2021 at 06:25:33PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > > On 01/02/21 17:54, Kevin Wolf wrote: > > > > > How does this option parsing work? Would then multiple patterns > > > > > separated by > > > > > comma as in -trace pattern1,pattern2 also work? > > > > This would be interpreted as an implied "enable" option with a value of > > > > "pattern1,pattern2". I don't think anything splits that string at the > > > > comma, so it would look for a trace event matching that string. > > > > > > Even worse, it would be interpreted as "-trace > > > enable=pattern1,pattern2=on" > > > (and raise a warning since recently). > > > > Maybe we're trying to solve the problem at the wrong level. > > There's no problem to solve, just trying to understand better what are the > valid options. It's already possible to enable multiple patterns with either > events=file or repeating -trace options (with or without enable=) so that's > already sufficient, I was just curious what other options are there and if > there's a simpler way that we could document. If not, using the current ways > that are now documented is OK I think.
The enable=PATTERN syntax is very limited. Repeating the --trace option is currently the only way to enter multiple patterns on the command-line. Stefan
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature