[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1275333392.15884.16.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com>
Date: Mon, 31 May 2010 15:16:32 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tracing: Add task activate/deactivate tracepoints
On Mon, 2010-05-31 at 20:28 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-05-31 at 12:37 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > Maybe I'm a bit paranoid, but I'm a little nervous to extend the
> > CREATE_TRACE_POINTS macro to be used within the header to create utility
> > functions, although, currently I don't think there's anything
> > technically wrong in doing so.
>
> Right, I can attest to the compile mess that results in not having
> it :-) Given that, I think we're fairly safe with stretching it like
> this, the compiler will yell real loud if you mess this up. So I'm not
> sure you need to be very paranoid about this.
Actually, I'm not worried about getting the utility functions right. I'm
actually more worried about extending TRACE_EVENT() and having this be a
thorn in our side when doing so.
-- 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