lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Apr]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [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


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-04-14 00:29    [W:0.172 / U:0.824 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site