Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 6 Nov 2008 15:57:49 -0500 | From | "Frank Ch. Eigler" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] ftrace: add an fsync tracer |
| |
Hi -
On Thu, Nov 06, 2008 at 09:29:03PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > [...] > I prefer we keep using trace points but do what jason has been proposing > for a while, which is add a format and arg list to the trace point > definition. > > Something like > > DEFINE_TRACE_FMT(sched_switch, > TPPROTO(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *prev, > struct task_struct *next), > TPARGS(rq, prev, next), > TPFMT("%d to %d\n", prev->pid, next->pid)); > > Which would be similar to attaching a trace_mark() to the trace point > and can in these cases save a lot of lines of code.
Can you explain how this would save any lines of code at all compared to the trace_mark() example? Both cases still need a bit of ~identical additional code to couple the markers (specified whichever way) to a trace buffer. Your version has the tracepoint machinery too, which is strictly additional. Where's the savings?
- FChE
| |