lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Sep]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [more markup]  [less markup]  [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
DateTue, 19 Sep 2006 12:23:01 -0400
FromKarim Yaghmour <>
SubjectRe: [PATCH] Linux Kernel Markers
Martin J. Bligh wrote:
> Why don't we just copy the whole damned function somewhere else, and
> make an instrumented copy (as a kernel module)?

If you're going to go with that, then why not just use a comment-based
markup? Then your alternate copy gets to be generated from the same
codebase. It also solves the inherent problem of decided on whether
a macro-based markup is far too intrusive, since you can mildly allow
yourself more verbosity in a comment. Not only that, but if it's
comment-based, it's even forseable, though maybe not desirable, than
*everything* that deals with this type of markup be maintained out
of tree (i.e. scripts generating alternate functions and all.)

Karim

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2006-09-19 16:15    [from the cache]
©2003-2008