Re: [PATCH 1/3] mce: acpi/apei: trace: Include PCIe AER trace eventconditionally

[Naveen N. Rao]

On 08/09/2013 12:53 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> [ attempting to try out claws-mail, hopefully this messages isn't
> scrambled ;-) ]

Works just fine :)

> On Thu,  8 Aug 2013 23:57:49 +0530
> "Naveen N. Rao" <naveen.n.rao@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Since we'll be adding multiple trace events to ras.h, we need to protect
> > each block appropriately so that they only get included in the right
> > places. Update PCIe AER trace event for this purpose.
>
> Why not make a separate file for each? You will have to define

The idea was to have all RAS-related trace points in a single place. 
This was discussed back when the PCIe AER trace event was added and so I 
chose to add the new event here as well.

> TRACE_EVENT_PCIE_AER for the users as well. That is, the places that
> include ras.h and use the trace_aer_*() tracepoints.

Do you mean the change I've done to aerdrv-errprint.c below? This trace 
point is currently only used there, so I guess we are ok?

Thanks,
Naveen


> > Signed-off-by: Naveen N. Rao <naveen.n.rao@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >   drivers/pci/pcie/aer/aerdrv_errprint.c | 1 +
> >   include/trace/events/ras.h             | 2 +-
> >   2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/pci/pcie/aer/aerdrv_errprint.c b/drivers/pci/pcie/aer/aerdrv_errprint.c
> > index 2c7c9f5..4d06859 100644
> > --- a/drivers/pci/pcie/aer/aerdrv_errprint.c
> > +++ b/drivers/pci/pcie/aer/aerdrv_errprint.c
> > @@ -24,6 +24,7 @@
> >   #include "aerdrv.h"
> >
> >   #define CREATE_TRACE_POINTS
> > +#define TRACE_EVENT_PCIE_AER
> >   #include <trace/events/ras.h>
> >
> >   #define AER_AGENT_RECEIVER		0
> > diff --git a/include/trace/events/ras.h b/include/trace/events/ras.h
> > index 88b8783..4a66142 100644
> > --- a/include/trace/events/ras.h
> > +++ b/include/trace/events/ras.h
> > @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
> >   #undef TRACE_SYSTEM
> >   #define TRACE_SYSTEM ras
> >
> > -#if !defined(_TRACE_AER_H) || defined(TRACE_HEADER_MULTI_READ)
> > +#if (!defined(_TRACE_AER_H) || defined(TRACE_HEADER_MULTI_READ)) && defined()
>
> I think it would look cleaner to encapsulate the one define with the
> other:
>
> #ifdef TRACE_EVENT_PCIE_AER
> #if !defined(_TRACE_AER_H) || defined(TRACE_HEADER_MULTI_READ)
>
>
> -- Steve
>
> >   #define _TRACE_AER_H
> >
> >   #include <linux/tracepoint.h>

--
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/