On Thu, 8 Apr 2021 07:28:43 +0300 "Tzvetomir Stoyanov (VMware)" <tz.stoyanov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > The warning() function is used in a lot of places in the trace-cmd > library, but there is no implementation. The function is implemented in > the trace-cmd application. There is also a weak implementation in > traceevent library, which is specific to that library. > Implemented a new tracecmd_lib_warning(), specific to the trace-cmd > library and replaced all warning() calls with the new function in the > library. The new function is implemented as weak, so it can be > overridden by the application. > The tracecm_lib_warning() uses tep_vwarning() from libtraceevent for > printing the warning, which is also a weak function and can be > overridden by the application. Hmm, this seems inconsistent with the other warnings. We have tep_warning(), tracefs_warning, and here it's tracecmd_lib_warning(). I wonder if it's better to drop the "_lib" part, and just call it, tracecmd_warning()? And if we do, we should rename tracecmd_lib_fatal() to just tracecmd_fatal(). The "lib" just seems redundant. -- Steve
|