Re: [PATCH v3 2/4] tracing: Make syscall_(un)regfunc arch-specific

[Josh Stone]

On 08/24/2009 12:58 PM, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 12:31:26PM -0700, Josh Stone wrote:
>> On 08/23/2009 02:14 PM, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>>> I really don't like that.
>>> See how the s390 and x86 version of the above code are completely
>>> identical?
>>>
>>> Please put this in kernel/ptrace.c
>>
>> Yes, I see your point, and I think kernel/ptrace.c is a fine place for
>> it.  Making it conditional on CONFIG_TRACEPOINTS and
>> CONFIG_HAVE_FTRACE_SYSCALLS is probably best too, though I think the
>> latter should now be HAVE_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINTS.
> 
> 
> As you prefer, this new name can be indeed more verbose.

Actually, now I'm second-guessing the need to move these at all.  Since
they only make sense for CONFIG_TRACEPOINTS, can't they stay in
kernel/tracepoint.c and just be conditional on HAVE_SYSCALL_TRACEPOINTS?
 The only real change needed is for the tracepoint declarations to also
be conditional.

Josh

--
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/