Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 14 Apr 2009 00:24:36 +0200 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/2] tracing, boottrace: Move include/trace/boot.h to include/linux/boottrace.h |
| |
* Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 11:54:11AM +0800, Zhaolei wrote: > > Impact: refactor code, no functionality changed > > > > Files in include/trace/ should be definition of tracepoints, and header > > file for boot trace should put to include/linux/. > > > > Signed-off-by: Zhao Lei <zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com> > > --- > > Until now I had the opinion that it's good to let every tracing > headers to be placed in include/trace/* because they are not > useful for anything else than the tracer itself so that we don't > encumber include/linux for private things. > > So that we have both tracepoints/trace_events plus the low-level > tracers headers in include/trace/* > > I'm not opposite to this change, but seeing this patch and the > recent divide of kmemtrace headers, I would like to know the > opinion of Ingo and Steven about the strict role of > include/trace/* Is it only for tracepoints-like bits, or oslo > intended for every private tracing purposes?
The header split itself is probably good to do - to keep the 'pure' portions of tracepoint definitions cleanly separated from more functional details like kmem tracer initialization.
The move to include/linux/ is indeed more debatable. I think if a header says 'footrace.h' in its name, it could easily be in include/trace/foo.h instead? Makes for a tidier structure - include/linux/ is massively over-crowded already.
Steve, what do you think?
Ingo
| |