[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1307262316590.6448@pianoman.cluster.toy>
Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 23:20:00 -0400 (EDT)
From: Vince Weaver <vince@...ter.net>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
cc: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>, mingo@...nel.org,
hpa@...or.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [tip:perf/core] perf: Update perf_event_type documentation
On Fri, 26 Jul 2013, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 11:20:24PM -0400, Vince Weaver wrote:
> >
> > a thing that personally bothers me are these imaginary struct definitions
> > added as part of the documentation that aren't actually available in the
> > public perf_event.h
> >
> > I can see why it's done, but it can be confusing picking out in later
> > definitions which struct fields are real and which ones are conceptual.
>
> Would it help if we changed the syntax to not look as much as real C
> would?
I've been thinking and I can't really think of a clearer way to present
the layout. So I guess it's fine the way it is. Hopefully not many
people are stuck having to implement code based on header file comments
anyway.
> > It might be clearer
> > if you stuck the perf_event_attr::sample_id_all qualifier each
> > place you add the sample_id field.
>
> Ah, I actually considered that but then got lazy and used the 0 sized
> struct idea :/
It might just be me. For whatever reason the C parser in my head doesn't
handle GNU extensions like 0-sized structs.
Vince
--
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