[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20101203145950.GB1711@nowhere>
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2010 15:59:53 +0100
From: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
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>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <compudj@...stal.dyndns.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/2 v2] tracing: Add conditional to tracepoints
On Fri, Dec 03, 2010 at 09:53:12AM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-12-03 at 15:47 +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>
> > Looks good
> >
> > Acked-by: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
> >
> > I suspect we'll need to fix some scripts/subperf commands in perf. Those that do:
> >
> > if (success)
> >
> > tests after reading a trace from a wakeup event.
>
> I guess the question is, is that "success" part of the ABI or not?
The fact is: if old tools read new sched wakeup traces, the tools won't work.
Now the debate is always the same.
--
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