[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160807125604.GA13602@krava>
Date: Sun, 7 Aug 2016 14:56:04 +0200
From: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
To: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/4] tools lib traceevent: Install fixes
On Fri, Aug 05, 2016 at 11:42:41AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> Em Fri, Aug 05, 2016 at 10:13:52AM -0400, Steven Rostedt escreveu:
> > On Tue, 2 Aug 2016 16:01:44 +0200
> > Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com> wrote:
> > > > BTW, before we start making this ready for their own libraries, I'd
> > > > like to make some changes with the naming convention. Mainly with
> > > > event_format and format_field.
> > > >
> > > > Perhaps we should change them to pevent_event and pevent_field?
> > >
> > > right, it does not have any global prefix for public symbols
> > >
> > > I'd actualy expect something like 'traceevent_',
> > > but 'pevent' is ok as well I guess
> >
> > OK, what's the consensus here? Should we keep "pevent_" or switch to
> > the longer "traceevent_"?
>
> traceevent_ matches libtraceevent, so I think would be more obvious the
> association of code with the library.
+1 for traceevent_ ... makes more sense to me
jirka
Powered by blists - more mailing lists