Quoting Oren Laadan ([email protected]): > > I wonder if it can be useful to decide on a common "format", that > can be useful in the future for automatic error analysis. E.g: > > "[PID %d ERR %d]: .....", for error with a specific task, and > "[PID %d ERR %d OBJ %d]: ......" for error with an object, and so on. > > Or even a bit more fancy, like: > > ckpt_write_err("EO", "error message %p blah", err, obj, ptr); > SPEC FMT VARS... > > Which ckpt_write_err() will translate to > > sprintf(s, "[PID %d ERR %d] FMT", VARS...); > > So the SPEC "EO" (stands for ERR, OBJ) becomes "[PID %d ERR %d OBJ %d]: " > (pid is mandatory, the rest requested by the caller): > E -> ERR %d > O -> OBJ %d > P -> PTR %p > S -> SYM %pS > etc...
Yes, it'd be useful. BTW it also would be useful to have mktree/ restart auto-detect such error strings and report them. -serge _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list [email protected] https://openvz.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
