Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 24 Sep 2007 14:53:11 -0400 | From | Mathieu Desnoyers <> | Subject | Re: [patch 4/7] Linux Kernel Markers - Architecture Independent Code |
| |
* Christoph Hellwig (hch@infradead.org) wrote: > On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 02:43:09PM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote: > > gcc doesn't like it if I put the attribute after the function in the > > implementation. Should I leave it before or separate the prototype from > > the implementation ? > > Just keep it where it was. > > > > There seem to be a lot of exports and some functions that don't seem > > > to be used by the obvious marker use-cases like your example, blktrace > > > or sputrace. Care to explain why we'd really want them or better cut > > > them out for this first submission? > > > > If you are referring to the exports you just told about in this email, > > I'll remove them, they are not needed. As for the "marker_get_iter" and > > friends, they are used to list the markers (I provide a /proc interface > > to list the markers in the subsequent modules and also use it to dump > > the marker list in a trace channel at trace start so I can later > > understand the event data by using the format strings as type > > identifiers). > > Sounds conceptually fine, but can we introduce this together with > the actualy users?
Sure, I'll move that down in my patch queue.
-- Mathieu Desnoyers Computer Engineering Ph.D. Student, Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal OpenPGP key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68 - 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/
| |