[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1273237145.22438.75.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com>
Date: Fri, 07 May 2010 08:59:05 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <compudj@...stal.dyndns.org>,
Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...hat.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/9 - v2][RFC] tracing: Remove per event trace
registering
On Fri, 2010-05-07 at 16:20 +0800, Li Zefan wrote:
> > @@ -935,11 +947,11 @@ event_create_dir(struct ftrace_event_call *call, struct dentry *d_events,
> > return -1;
> > }
> >
> > - if (call->regfunc)
> > + if (call->class->probe || call->class->reg)
> > trace_create_file("enable", 0644, call->dir, call,
> > enable);
> >
> > - if (call->id && call->perf_event_enable)
> > + if (call->id && (call->class->perf_probe || call->class->reg))
> > trace_create_file("id", 0444, call->dir, call,
> > id);
> >
>
> Accessing of ->perf_probe needs to be guarded with CONFIG_PERF_EVENTS,
> otherwise it won't pass compile.
>
> The original code is fine, because ->perf_event_enable is always there
> regardless of CONFIG_PERF_EVENTS.
Good catch! I wanted to test the !CONFIG_PERF_EVENTS but that needs to
be done on a non x86 box. I'll need to do that before posting my non-RFC
patch set.
-- Steve
--
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