[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090610092644.GA20889@elte.hu>
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2009 11:26:44 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@...il.com>,
Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <compudj@...stal.dyndns.org>,
Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>,
Zhaolei <zhaolei@...fujitsu.com>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
Jason Baron <jbaron@...hat.com>,
Jiaying Zhang <jiayingz@...gle.com>,
Tom Zanussi <tzanussi@...il.com>,
Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@...fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/11] [GIT PULL] more updates for the tag format
* Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote:
>
> Ingo,
>
> Please pull the latest tip/tracing/event-print-format tree, which can be found at:
>
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rostedt/linux-2.6-trace.git
> tip/tracing/event-print-format
>
>
> Li Zefan (1):
> tracing/events: convert block trace points to TRACE_EVENT(), fix
>
> Steven Rostedt (10):
> tracing: add nsec2sec print formats
> tracing: convert lockdep lock_acquired trace point to use nsec2usec tag
> tracing: add major and minor tags for print format
> tracing: use << to print < instead of \<
> tracing: convert the block trace points to use the new tag format
> tracing: add test for strings in event tag format
> tracing: add func and symfunc to tag format
> tracing: check full name for field
> tracing: update sample code with new tag format
> tracing: move '>' to out of macros and into print statement
>
> ----
> include/linux/blktrace_api.h | 4 +-
> include/linux/ftrace_event.h | 3 +-
> include/trace/events/block.h | 101 +++------
> include/trace/events/irq.h | 8 +-
> include/trace/events/kmem.h | 12 +-
> include/trace/events/lockdep.h | 8 +-
> include/trace/ftrace.h | 2 +-
> kernel/trace/trace_output.c | 2 +-
> kernel/trace/trace_output.h | 4 +
> kernel/trace/trace_read_binary.c | 304 +++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> samples/trace_events/trace-events-sample.c | 21 ++-
> samples/trace_events/trace-events-sample.h | 66 ++++++
> 12 files changed, 399 insertions(+), 136 deletions(-)
Hm, that's way too much back and forth really - trivial typo fixes,
build failure, etc. This is really a 'oh, the merge window is
coming' last minute scrambling and we dont want to mess up the
squeaky-clean tracing tree history be messed up with this.
Frederic also expressed worries about the tag format. Could we have
a wider buy-in for this format?
I've separated these bits into tip:tracing/ftrace, and kept
tip:tracing/core on a pre-print-formats state (going back 8
commits), so that upstream merging of the other bits does not get
held up.
Could we try a cleaner, bisectable, consiously built up version of
these final tracing/core..tracing/ftrace please? I think we can -
the rest of the tree is clean. Please do a exact-same-content rebase
so that the merge back gets obvious and that the testing we've
injected does not get invalidated?
Ingo
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists