[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAD8CoPCJ0g7CLjQH9NL9bCfiPJqito1XZnitDg1MQOC6=gb=Gg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2023 21:16:49 +0800
From: Ze Gao <zegao2021@...il.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org,
linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-trace-devel@...r.kernel.org, Ze Gao <zegao@...cent.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 4/6] sched, tracing: reorganize fields of switch
event struct
Oops, I thought sending this series for RFC is the "effort" you mean
to audit the users :/
Correct me if I'm making stupid moves here and enlighten me what
I should do furthermore to audit the users.
Thanks,
Ze
On Tue, Aug 1, 2023 at 7:47 PM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 01, 2023 at 05:01:22PM +0800, Ze Gao wrote:
> > Report priorities in 'short' and prev_state in 'int' to save
> > some buffer space. And also reorder the fields so that we take
> > struct alignment into consideration to make the record compact.
> >
> > Suggested-by: Steven Rostedt (Google) <rostedt@...dmis.org>
>
> I don't see a single line describing the effort you've done to audit
> consumers of this tracepoint.
>
> *IF* you're wanting to break this tracepoint ABI, because seriously
> that's what it is, then you get to invest the time and effort to audit
> the users.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists