Re: [PATCH 2/9 - v2][RFC] tracing: Let tracepoints have datapassed to tracepoint callbacks

[Steven Rostedt]

On Fri, 2010-05-07 at 20:06 +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:

> No, what I meant is that you have:
> 
> #ifdef CONFIG_TRACEPOINTS
> [...]
> +#define DECLARE_TRACE_NOARGS(name)                                       \
>       __DECLARE_TRACE(name, void, , void *__data, __data)
> 
> #define DECLARE_TRACE(name, proto, args)                         \
>       __DECLARE_TRACE(name, PARAMS(proto), PARAMS(args),      \
>                       PARAMS(proto, void *__data),            \
>                       PARAMS(args, __data))
> [...]
> #else
> [...]
> +#define DECLARE_TRACE_NOARGS(name)                                       \
>       __DECLARE_TRACE(name, void, , void *__data, __data)
> 
> #define DECLARE_TRACE(name, proto, args)                         \
>       __DECLARE_TRACE(name, PARAMS(proto), PARAMS(args),      \
>                       PARAMS(proto, void *__data),            \
>                       PARAMS(args, __data)
> [...]
> #endif
> 
> 
> See? They seem to be the exact same version, so this could be only
> one version outside the ifdef.
> And the CONFIG_TRACEPOINTS on/off case is dealt from __DECLARE_TRACE().

Ah, I see (said the blind man as he slipped and fell on the ice).

-- 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/