Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 02 Dec 2009 23:00:34 -0500 | From | Masami Hiramatsu <> | Subject | Re: trace/events: DECLARE vs DEFINE semantic |
| |
Mathieu Desnoyers wrote: > In addition, I wonder if we should rename "CREATE_TRACE_POINTS" to > something more suitable while we are here ? Basically, it will affect > all TRACE_CLASS/TRACE_CLASS_EVENT/TRACE_EVENT from headers included > after it's defined.
Agreed, CREATE_TRACE_POINTS is a bit irritating thing :-(
For example, if we call tracepoints defined in same-header on several different files, we need to check other people have already defined CREATE_TRACE_POINTS on another file, because CREATE_TRACE_POINTS must be used once for each header...
So, how about introducing a c file which is only for defining tracepoints for kernel parts ? or defining tracepoints in kernel at the beginning of kernel/tracepoint.c ? (and don't touch tracepoints in modules)
e.g.
@kernel/tracepoint.c ... #define CREATE_TRACE_POINTS #include <trace/events/sched.h> #include <trace/events/...> ...
@kernel/sched.c ... #include <trace/events/sched.h> /* Just include events header */ ...
@fs/ext4/super.c (no change, since it can be module) ... #define CREATE_TRACE_POINTS #include <trace/events/ext4.h> ...
Hmm?
Thank you,
-- Masami Hiramatsu
Software Engineer Hitachi Computer Products (America), Inc. Software Solutions Division
e-mail: mhiramat@redhat.com
| |