From: Sergey Kaplun via Tarantool-patches <tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org> To: Maxim Kokryashkin <max.kokryashkin@gmail.com> Cc: tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org Subject: Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH luajit v2] memprof: introduce cli flag to run dump parser Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2022 16:18:47 +0300 [thread overview] Message-ID: <Y4YGtzFfHa1i0uL9@root> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20210912145118.392561-1-m.kokryashkin@tarantool.org> Hi, Maxim! Thanks for the patch! Sorry, for such late review! Please consider my comments below. On 12.09.21, Maxim Kokryashkin wrote: > It is really unconvinient to use a standalone shell script to parse Typo: s/unconvinient/inconvenient/ > memprof dump. That is why this commit intoroduces a CLI flag for tools Typo: s/intoroduces/introduces/ > to the LuaJIT, so now it is possible to parse memprof dump > as simple as: > ``` > luajit -tm memprof.bin > ``` I don't see any error message in case of unexisted file or anything. | $ src/luajit -tm /tmp/abracadabra | Also, it doesn't work for existing valid files: | $ src/luajit -tm memprof.bin; echo $? | 1 | | $ tools/luajit-parse-memprof memprof.bin | ALLOCATIONS | INTERNAL: 948 events +32167 bytes -0 bytes | ... Am I doing smth wrong? > > Closes tarantool/tarantool#5688 > --- > GitHub branch: > https://github.com/tarantool/luajit/tree/fckxorg/gh-5688-cli-for-memprof-parse > > Issue: > https://github.com/tarantool/tarantool/issues/5688 > > Also, I am not sure whether it is ok to do that[1] trick with `argn` or > not. It seems reasonable to run tools using the `runargs` method, but > then the `argn` should be adjusted in a such way, that the > `createargtable` will save parameters for the tool and 'runargs' will > execute the script itself. > > [1]: https://github.com/tarantool/luajit/blob/8c074ebe7336a27f15484f1bb7eff757fa92c2f4/src/luajit.c#L565 > > CMakeLists.txt | 9 ++++---- > src/CMakeLists.txt | 5 +++++ > src/lj_tools_conf.h.in | 6 ++++++ > src/luajit.c | 49 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------- > tools/CMakeLists.txt | 2 ++ > 5 files changed, 56 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) Should we update original Makefile as well? Also, it will be nice to add any tests for the new feature. > create mode 100644 src/lj_tools_conf.h.in > > diff --git a/CMakeLists.txt b/CMakeLists.txt > index 5348e043..74826095 100644 > --- a/CMakeLists.txt > +++ b/CMakeLists.txt > @@ -250,6 +250,11 @@ endif() <snipped> > diff --git a/src/CMakeLists.txt b/src/CMakeLists.txt > index 809aac68..d9debccf 100644 > --- a/src/CMakeLists.txt > +++ b/src/CMakeLists.txt <snipped> > diff --git a/src/lj_tools_conf.h.in b/src/lj_tools_conf.h.in > new file mode 100644 > index 00000000..366c3ec4 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/src/lj_tools_conf.h.in <snipped> > diff --git a/src/luajit.c b/src/luajit.c > index 1ca24301..525797a5 100644 > --- a/src/luajit.c > +++ b/src/luajit.c > @@ -19,6 +19,8 @@ > > #include "lj_arch.h" > > +#include "lj_tools_conf.h" > + > #if LJ_TARGET_POSIX > #include <unistd.h> > #define lua_stdin_is_tty() isatty(0) > @@ -72,6 +74,7 @@ static void print_usage(void) > " -O[opt] Control LuaJIT optimizations.\n" > " -i Enter interactive mode after executing " LUA_QL("script") ".\n" > " -v Show version information.\n" > + " -t[cmd] Execute tool.\n" > " -E Ignore environment variables.\n" > " -- Stop handling options.\n" > " - Execute stdin and stop handling options.\n", stderr); > @@ -266,21 +269,17 @@ static void dotty(lua_State *L) > progname = oldprogname; > } > > -static int handle_script(lua_State *L, char **argx) > +static int call_script(lua_State *L, const char *fname) > { > - int status; > - const char *fname = argx[0]; > - if (strcmp(fname, "-") == 0 && strcmp(argx[-1], "--") != 0) > - fname = NULL; /* stdin */ > - status = luaL_loadfile(L, fname); > + int status = luaL_loadfile(L, fname); > if (status == LUA_OK) { > /* Fetch args from arg table. LUA_INIT or -e might have changed them. */ > int narg = 0; > lua_getglobal(L, "arg"); > if (lua_istable(L, -1)) { > do { > - narg++; > - lua_rawgeti(L, -narg, narg); > + narg++; > + lua_rawgeti(L, -narg, narg); I suppose, that this change is unnecessary. > } while (!lua_isnil(L, -1)); > lua_pop(L, 1); > lua_remove(L, -narg); > @@ -290,6 +289,16 @@ static int handle_script(lua_State *L, char **argx) > } > status = docall(L, narg, 0); > } > + return status; > +} > + > +static int handle_script(lua_State *L, char **argx) > +{ > + int status; > + const char *fname = argx[0]; > + if (strcmp(fname, "-") == 0 && strcmp(argx[-1], "--") != 0) > + fname = NULL; /* stdin */ > + status = call_script(L, fname); > return report(L, status); > } > > @@ -361,6 +370,15 @@ static int dojitcmd(lua_State *L, const char *cmd) > return runcmdopt(L, opt ? opt+1 : opt); > } > > +static int dotoolcmd(lua_State *L, const char *cmd) > +{ > + if(strcmp(cmd, "m") == 0) { Typo: trailing whytespace ------^ > + const int status = call_script(L, PARSER_PATH); > + return status == LUA_OK; > + } > + return -1; > +} > + > /* Optimization flags. */ > static int dojitopt(lua_State *L, const char *opt) > { > @@ -398,6 +416,7 @@ static int dobytecode(lua_State *L, char **argv) > #define FLAGS_EXEC 4 > #define FLAGS_OPTION 8 > #define FLAGS_NOENV 16 > +#define FLAGS_TOOL 32 Something wrong with indent here. > > static int collectargs(char **argv, int *flags) > { > @@ -419,14 +438,19 @@ static int collectargs(char **argv, int *flags) > notail(argv[i]); > *flags |= FLAGS_VERSION; > break; > + case 't': > + *flags |= FLAGS_TOOL; > + if (argv[i][2] == '\0') return -1; > + if (argv[i + 1] == NULL) return -1; > + return i + 1; > case 'e': > *flags |= FLAGS_EXEC; > case 'j': /* LuaJIT extension */ > case 'l': > *flags |= FLAGS_OPTION; > if (argv[i][2] == '\0') { > - i++; > - if (argv[i] == NULL) return -1; > + i++; > + if (argv[i] == NULL) return -1; I suppose, that this change is unnecessary. > } > break; > case 'O': break; /* LuaJIT extension */ > @@ -474,6 +498,9 @@ static int runargs(lua_State *L, char **argv, int argn) > return 1; > break; > } > + case 't' : Minor: I suggest to add a comment that this is Tarantool's fork extention. > + const char *cmd = argv[i] + 2; > + return dotoolcmd(L, cmd) == LUA_OK; > case 'O': /* LuaJIT extension. */ > if (dojitopt(L, argv[i] + 2)) > return 1; > @@ -535,7 +562,7 @@ static int pmain(lua_State *L) > luaL_openlibs(L); > lua_gc(L, LUA_GCRESTART, -1); > > - createargtable(L, argv, s->argc, argn); > + createargtable(L, argv, s->argc, (flags & FLAGS_TOOL) ? argn - 1 : argn); > > if (!(flags & FLAGS_NOENV)) { > s->status = handle_luainit(L); > diff --git a/tools/CMakeLists.txt b/tools/CMakeLists.txt > index 61830e44..84129153 100644 > --- a/tools/CMakeLists.txt > +++ b/tools/CMakeLists.txt <snipped> > -- > 2.33.0 > -- Best regards, Sergey Kaplun
prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-11-29 13:22 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2021-09-12 14:51 Maxim Kokryashkin via Tarantool-patches 2022-11-29 13:18 ` Sergey Kaplun via Tarantool-patches [this message]
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=Y4YGtzFfHa1i0uL9@root \ --to=tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org \ --cc=max.kokryashkin@gmail.com \ --cc=skaplun@tarantool.org \ --subject='Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH luajit v2] memprof: introduce cli flag to run dump parser' \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox