[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20101028131737.GA20674@Krystal>
Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2010 09:17:37 -0400
From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tracing: fix TRACE_EVENT power tracepoint creation
* Steven Rostedt (rostedt@...dmis.org) wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-10-28 at 07:03 -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
>
> > Given that trace/power.h is inluded in more than one .c file, generating
> > DEFINE_TRACE() when CREATE_TRACE_POINTS is not set does not work. So what
> > alternative do you suggest ?
>
> Right, DEFINE_TRACE should only be set when CREATE_TRACE_POINTS is set,
> and that is only set in the C file that the DEFINE_TRACE is to be
> defined.
>
> In fact, I don't even see what bug you are trying to fix?
>
> The file include/trace/define_trace.h converts all the TRACE_EVENTS()
> into DEFINE_TRACE() when CREATE_TRACE_POINTS is set. No other C file
> that includes power.h should have CREATE_TRACE_POINTS set. I guess if it
> did, the CONFIG_EVENT_TRACING would break too.
>
> It should just work.
This is the culprit:
kernel/trace/ is not built when CONFIG_TRACING=n
kernel/trace/power-traces.o is only built when CONFIG_EVENT_TRACING=y
So the DEFINE_TRACE is never done when CONFIG_EVENT_TRACING=n or
CONFIG_TRACING=n.
What you are telling me is that changing the makefiles should be enough, and I
don't need to add those DEFINE_TRACE(), correct ?
Thanks,
Mathieu
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
Operating System Efficiency R&D Consultant
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.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