linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH, RFC] sputrace: use the generic event tracer

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20090506144708.GC29044@elte.hu>
Date:	Wed, 6 May 2009 16:47:08 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Steven Rostedt <srostedt@...hat.com>
Cc:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>, cbe-oss-dev@...abs.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Fr?d?ric Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH, RFC] sputrace: use the generic event tracer


* Steven Rostedt <srostedt@...hat.com> wrote:

> 
> On Wed, 2009-05-06 at 13:23 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> > > > > +# magic for the trace events
> > > > > +CFLAGS_sched.o := -I$(src)
> > > > 
> > > > Steve, i'm wondering whether this type of Makefile hackery (caused 
> > > > by modular tracepoints) could be eliminated ...
> > > 
> > > We would just have to include the header file with "" instead of 
> > > <>. But I remember Steve not liking this when we talked about it.
> > 
> > Yeah. But changing Makefiles isnt particularly clean either ...
> > 
> > And adding -I$(src) can have side-effects: we often have a local 
> > foo.h while an include/linux/foo.h as well.
> 
> That still would not conflict, because
> 
> #include "foo.h"
> 
> will not include "linux/foo.h" and
> 
> #include <linux/foo.h>
> 
> will not include a local foo.h, unless there's also a local "linux"
> directory with a foo.h in it.
>
> The Makefile hack has to do with being able to have the "foo.h" 
> file with the TRACE_EVENTs someplace other than include/trace.
> 
> If the "foo.h" is in include/trace.h we do not need to include 
> this hack. But because the include/trace/define_trace.h needs to 
> include the "foo.h" file recursively, it must be able to find it. 
> If we do not add a search path, include/trace/define_trace.h will 
> not look in the other locations.
> 
> Note, as Christoph did, we only need to add the include path to 
> the file that defines "CREATE_TRACE_POINTS". Which is only one 
> file.
> 
> CFLAGS_sched.o := -I$(src)
> 
> Only touches the sched.c file in that directory (Note, for those 
> reading this thread out of context, this is not the same file as 
> kernel/sched.c)

Yeah, i guess we can live with it. It still feels imperfect though.

(btw., find below a small typo fix)

	Ingo

diff --git a/include/trace/define_trace.h b/include/trace/define_trace.h
index f7a7ae1..1d6fa17 100644
--- a/include/trace/define_trace.h
+++ b/include/trace/define_trace.h
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
 /*
- * Trace files that want to automate creationg of all tracepoints defined
+ * Trace files that want to automate the creation of all tracepoints defined
  * in their file should include this file. The following are macros that the
  * trace file may define:
  *
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/