Re: [PATCH 5/8] tracing/events: move the ftrace event tracing codeto core

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Tue, 2009-04-14 at 13:23 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> + * static struct trace_event ftrace_event_type_<call> = {
> + *     .trace                  = ftrace_raw_output_<call>, <-- stage 2
> + * };

> + * static struct ftrace_event_call __used
> + * __attribute__((__aligned__(4)))
> + * __attribute__((section("_ftrace_events"))) event_<call> = {
> + *     .name                   = "<call>",
> + *     .system                 = "<system>",
> + *     .raw_init               = ftrace_raw_init_event_<call>,
> + *     .regfunc                = ftrace_reg_event_<call>,
> + *     .unregfunc              = ftrace_unreg_event_<call>,
> + *     .show_format            = ftrace_format_<call>,
> + * }

Is there a good reason these are two different structs?

I've always wondered about that, it seems natural to unify them and to
generalize the reverse lookup hash that is now private to trace_output.

The trace_event_profile code could use that reverse lookup, that linear
search it currently does it really lame.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/