Re: [PATCH 3/3] tracing/function-return-tracer: add the overrun field

[Frédéric Weisbecker]

2008/11/18 Frédéric Weisbecker <fweisbec@xxxxxxxxx>:
> 2008/11/18 Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
>> How about a compromise, start off the patch series getting it working with
>> task struct static array, and then finish the series with the dynamic
>> array.
>>
>> This is my development model, because it lets me know where the bugs are
>> better. If we find some strange bug, this can help pin point via a bisect
>> if the bug is with the general code, or with the use of a dynamic array.
>>
>> Just my preference ;-)
>
>
> Ooh. I first agreed with Ingo's arguments about the fact that distros
> can enable it whithout worrying.
> But as I read your message, I guess that would be better to start with
> static arrays to better find the bugs,
> state by state...
>
> Ingo, what do you think?
>

And then a last state with dynamic arrays...
--
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/