[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <BANLkTiknxGh5ObC0U=xodswwdFjRkqkhyA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2011 15:04:35 -0700
From: Vaibhav Nagarnaik <vnagarnaik@...gle.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Michael Rubin <mrubin@...gle.com>,
David Sharp <dhsharp@...gle.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
x86@...nel.org, Jiaying Zhang <jiayingz@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] trace: Add x86 irq vector entry/exit tracepoints
On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 1:26 PM, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Apr 2011, Vaibhav Nagarnaik wrote:
>
>> diff --git a/include/trace/events/irq.h b/include/trace/events/irq.h
>> index 4b4c7d9..b70383e 100644
>> --- a/include/trace/events/irq.h
>> +++ b/include/trace/events/irq.h
>> @@ -139,6 +139,51 @@ DEFINE_EVENT(softirq, softirq_raise,
>> TP_ARGS(vec_nr)
>> );
>>
>> +#include <asm/irq_vectors.h>
>
> And how is that supposed to compile on anything else than arch/x86 and
> arch/um ? And no, we don't want an #ifdef x86 for that.
>
You are right. I didn't think of other platforms.
If I include <asm/irq.h>, it should compile on all the platforms. What do you
think?
The other way is to define the irq_vectors as a separate trace system which
only gets initialized if the platform files create the tracepoints for it. The
only difference I see is that the tracepoints would move from under irq/ to
irq_vectors/.
> Thanks,
>
> tglx
>
Thanks for your quick responses.
Vaibhav Nagarnaik
--
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