Change Details

The following code implements inline tracing for the kinst DTrace provider. Briefly explained, what the code does is, for each probe of the form: ``` kinst::<inline_func>:<entry/return> ``` libdtrace checks to see if `<inline_func>` is indeed an inline function, where in this case it finds all inline copies of it and creates new probes for each one of them. Otherwise, it converts the probe to an FBT one so that we don't duplicate FBT's functionality in kinst. Some things to note: Should the `dtsp_inline`, `dtsp_entry` and `dtsp_return` flags be merged into a `dtsp_flags` field? Are the `warn*()`/`err*()` calls appropriate here? DTrace's `xywarn()` and `dt_handle_liberr()` are not really want I want. `dt_sugar_kinst_find_caller_func()` has x86-only code, we'll have to visit it again when kinst is ported to new platforms. Perhaps an `#ifdef` would be better than splitting the code into multiple files. I'm ignoring functions (with a warning) that do not start with `push %rbp`, since kinst(4) currently also ignores such functions. I'm planning to change kinst's logic to search for `pop %rbp` anywhere in the function, instead of checking if the first instruction is `push %rbp`.

The following code implements inline tracing for the kinst DTrace provider. Briefly explained, what the code does is, for each probe of the form: ``` kinst::<inline_func>:<entry/return> ``` libdtrace checks to see if `<inline_func>` is indeed an inline function, where in this case it finds all inline copies of it and creates new probes for each one of them. Otherwise, it converts the probe to an FBT one so that we don't duplicate FBT's functionality in kinst. Some things to note: Should the `dtsp_inline`, `dtsp_entry` and `dtsp_return` flags be merged into a `dtsp_flags` field? Are the `warn*()`/`err*()` calls appropriate here? DTrace's `xywarn()` and `dt_handle_liberr()` are not really want I want. `dt_sugar_kinst_find_caller_func()` has x86-only code, we'll have to visit it again when kinst is ported to new platforms. Perhaps an `#ifdef` would be better than splitting the code into multiple files.

The following code implements inline tracing for the kinst DTrace provider. Briefly explained, what the code does is, for each probe of the form: ``` kinst::<inline_func>:<entry/return> ``` libdtrace checks to see if `<inline_func>` is indeed an inline function, where in this case it finds all inline copies of it and creates new probes for each one of them. Otherwise, it converts the probe to an FBT one so that we don't duplicate FBT's functionality in kinst. Some things to note: Should the `dtsp_inline`, `dtsp_entry` and `dtsp_return` flags be merged into a `dtsp_flags` field? Are the `warn*()`/`err*()` calls appropriate here? DTrace's `xywarn()` and `dt_handle_liberr()` are not really want I want. `dt_sugar_kinst_find_caller_func()` has x86-only code, we'll have to visit it again when kinst is ported to new platforms. Perhaps an `#ifdef` would be better than splitting the code into multiple files. I'm ignoring functions (with a warning) that do not start with `push %rbp`, since kinst(4) currently also ignores such functions. I'm planning to change kinst's logic to search for `pop %rbp` anywhere in the function, instead of checking if the first instruction is `push %rbp`.