[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4C516B33.9000007@hitachi.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2010 20:51:15 +0900
From: Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>
To: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...radead.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Mark Wielaard <mjw@...hat.com>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Naren A Devaiah <naren.devaiah@...ibm.com>,
Jim Keniston <jkenisto@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
"Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@...hat.com>,
Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@...ibm.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
2nddept-manager@....hitachi.co.jp
Subject: Re: [PATCHv10 2.6.35-rc6-tip 10/14] perf: rename common fields/functions
from kprobe to probe.
Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
> As a precursor for perf to support uprobes, rename fields/functions
> that had kprobe in their name but can be shared across perf-kprobes
> and perf-uprobes to probe.
Yeah, renaming itself is OK for me. But please do it carefully,
I can see some gaps between 1st line and 2nd line like below
after applying this patch...
static int kprobe_convert_to_perf_probe(struct probe_trace_point *tp,
struct perf_probe_point *pp)
But just a trivial style issue. :)
--
Masami HIRAMATSU
2nd Research Dept.
Hitachi, Ltd., Systems Development Laboratory
E-mail: masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com
--
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