[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20221122173614.3f5c10e7@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2022 17:36:14 -0500
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: ira.weiny@...el.com
Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Alison Schofield <alison.schofield@...el.com>,
Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@...el.com>,
Ben Widawsky <bwidawsk@...nel.org>,
Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>,
Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-cxl@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/11] cxl/mem: Trace Memory Module Event Record
On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 10:57:54 -0800
ira.weiny@...el.com wrote:
> static bool cxl_event_tracing_enabled(void)
> {
> return trace_cxl_generic_event_enabled() ||
> trace_cxl_general_media_enabled() ||
> - trace_cxl_dram_enabled();
> + trace_cxl_dram_enabled() ||
> + trace_cxl_memory_module_enabled();
> }
>
My only concern with this patch set is that gcc may decide to not inline
this function and you will lose the performance of the static branches
provided by the trace_cxl_*enabled() functions.
Other than that, for patches 5-7 from a tracing perspective:
Reviewed-by: Steven Rostedt (Google) <rostedt@...dmis.org>
-- Steve
Powered by blists - more mailing lists