Re: [PATCH 02/11] tracing: Introduce TRACE_EVENT_INJECT

[Frederic Weisbecker]

On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 09:05:06AM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-02-10 at 11:04 +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> 
> > > We can add a register_event_injector later. For now, why not just add
> > > the TRACE_EVENT() and then hook to it in perf using the normal
> > > tracepoint mechanism.
> > > 
> > > You could add some macro around the trace_init_lock_class() call that
> > > would facilitate finding all the locks you need. This would probably be
> > > a bit more straight forward than to overload TRACE_EVENT() again.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > I'm not sure what you mean by that.
> 
> Looking back at where trace_lock_class_init() was placed, you don't need
> a wrapper. But instead, why not just have perf hook directly into the
> trace_lock_class_init trace point, and do its injection directly.
> Instead of needing to add some hack to TRACE_EVENT()?


We could. But we expect further events may need such catch-up by
injection system. And ftrace will also need to perform this injection.

That's why I think something more generic would be more reasonable.

--
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/