Re: [PATCH 0/3] tracing: more list_empty(perf_events) checks
From: Oleg Nesterov
Date: Tue Jun 18 2013 - 10:51:29 EST
On 06/17, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-06-17 at 22:18 +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > On 06/17, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > >
> > > DECLARE_EVENT_CLASS()->perf_trace_##call() is not trivial because
> > > of __perf_task()
> > Perhaps we can do something like below?
> Did this actually compile for you?
Why did you ask?
Perhaps you are trying to say that this patch needs more work...
Just because it can't be compiled? Pedant.
> > @@ -659,13 +665,12 @@ perf_trace_##call(void *__data, proto) \
> > int __data_size; \
> > int rctx; \
> > \
> > - perf_fetch_caller_regs(&__regs); \
> > - \
> > __data_size = ftrace_get_offsets_##call(&__data_offsets, args); \
> OK, so here the task gets assigned the val, and so does count.
> This may not be a bad approach, but instead of having TP_perf_arg() in
> events/sched.h, keep the TP_perf_task() and TP_perf_count(), and have
> whatever is put there assigned.
Or this, yes.
OK. Let me try to make something working. At least, something I believe
should work, I will mostly rely on your review anyway.
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/