[PATCH] tevent patches

[Stefan (metze) Metzmacher]

Am 28.02.2014 12:41, schrieb Volker Lendecke:
> On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 10:26:32AM +0100, Stefan (metze) Metzmacher wrote:
>> The problem I have with this is that this costs much more than
>> the first patchset for the most performance critical users
>> smbd and ctdbd. A additional talloc() call per event registration
>> costs a lot more than a function call to a noop function.
> 
> What about adding the tevent_trace_handler_data at the end
> of the tevent structures in case they are needed and play
> some offsetof magic in case the additional memory used is a
> concern if the trace points are not needed?

Yes, I think we can just add them into the structures, but that would be
an incompatible change, which I'd like to avoid for now.

Adding this information at tevent_add_fd() time would make things like
turning tracing on and off at runtime, similar to 'smbcontrol debug',
impossible.

Maybe specifying the desired tracepoints after tevent_set_trace_callback()
would be better.

metze