On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 04:56:39PM +0530, haris iqbal wrote: > On Sun, Feb 14, 2016 at 5:54 AM, Dmitry V. Levin wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 09:04:56PM +0530, haris iqbal wrote: [...] > >> Another thing. If I did not miss any step above then I can start thinking > >> about the new category to be added. > > > > What category seems the most promising so far? > > Ok, I did a little research to find out the system calls that are > missing a group. And I found some calls that can be made into groups. > They are as follows. > > 1) Timer and Clock type. This group will include all the system calls > that create per-process timers, and the ones that work on clocks. > Example : timer_* and clock_*. May be others also. > > 2) Another one that can be added, which Dmitry suggested in the > beginning was all system calls dealing with uid and gid. > > 3) The last one which I noticed that can be added are the system calls > which deal with scheduler. sched_* system calls. > > NOTE: If there are any suggestions, please feel free to comment. :)
There are at least three directions to look for potential syscall groups: - Different syscalls from the same family, e.g. io_*, *xattr, *timer*, clock_*, sched_*, *uid, *gid, mq_*, NUMA-related (get_mempolicy, mbind, migrate_pages, move_pages, set_mempolicy), etc. - Small groups of similar syscalls, often pairs where one syscall is a predecessor of another, e.g. open/openat and similar *at pairs, accept/accept4, dup2/dup3, epoll_create/epoll_create1, eventfd/eventfd2, inotify_init/inotify_init1, pipe/pipe2, pselect/pselect6, rename/renameat/renameat2, umount/umount2, etc. On newer architectures older syscalls are not available, so it might be a good idea from portability PoV. For example, a group of open-like syscalls could be used instead of trace=open,openat to do a more portable tracing across different architectures. - Small groups of syscalls that are almost the same but called differently between architectures, e.g. newfstatat/fstatat64, or have very subtle differences, like LFS vs non-LFS editions of syscalls. In such cases, there is no simple rule to find out the right syscall name(s) on a given architecture, so having a way to specify, e.g. all fstatat-like syscalls might be a good idea from portability PoV. If we are going to have so many different syscall groups, it's time to think about a naming policy. I think that all new syscall group names should start with a non-alphanumeric symbol (e.g. "%" or "@") to avoid collisions with syscall names. -- ldv
pgp5B7pfWZxV7.pgp
Description: PGP signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Site24x7 APM Insight: Get Deep Visibility into Application Performance APM + Mobile APM + RUM: Monitor 3 App instances at just $35/Month Monitor end-to-end web transactions and take corrective actions now Troubleshoot faster and improve end-user experience. Signup Now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=272487151&iu=/4140
_______________________________________________ Strace-devel mailing list Strace-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/strace-devel
