Re: Problem with CREATE_TRACE_POINTS and recursion safety

[Steven Rostedt]

On Thu, 16 Apr 2009, Christoph Hellwig wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 11:09:14PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > I hate to do this because it adds some more work to the developer adding a 
> > new trace point header, but we could just remove the CREATE_TRACE_POINTS 
> > and do in the trace/events/*.h headers:
> > 
> > #ifdef CREATE_FOO_TRACE_POINTS
> > #include <trace/define_trace.h>
> > #endif
> > 
> > in all tracepoint headers. I originally had it this way with just the 
> > CREATE_TRACE_POINTS, but Christoph Hellwig and Mathieu both suggested 
> > putting that into define_trace.h.  It seems so much cleaner to keep it in 
> > define_trace.h, but if it is causing too many headaches, it may not be 
> > worth it :-/
> 
> I still don't like the magic include in every trace header.
> 
> What about
> 
> #define CREATE_FOO_TRACE_POINTS	"subsystem"
> 
> to only create them for a given subsystem?

I tried this. But it seems that there's no way to compare strings with the 
preprocessor. You can compare numbers, but having each subsystem define 
its own number would be a pain to manage.

-- Steve

--
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/