public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Pekka Enberg <penberg@cs.helsinki.fi>
To: "Brown, Len" <len.brown@intel.com>
Cc: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: RE: [PATCH] acpi: remove function tracing macros
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 20:45:19 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1137437119.10352.9.camel@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <F7DC2337C7631D4386A2DF6E8FB22B3005B835E4@hdsmsx401.amr.corp.intel.com>

Hi Len,

On Mon, 2006-01-16 at 13:14 -0500, Brown, Len wrote:
> >This patch removes function tracing macro usage from drivers/acpi/. In
> >particular, ACPI_FUNCTION_TRACE are ACPI_FUNCTION_NAME removed 
> >completely and return_VALUE, return_PTR, and return_ACPI_STATUS
> >are converted with proper use of return.
> 
> I'm sorry, I can't apply this source clean-up patch.
> 
> We need tracing to debug interpreter failures on hardware
> in the field.

I appreciate that but per-function tracing is overkill. Especially since
the macros used for it are very obfuscating (i.e. return_VALUE, et al)
and we have things like kprobes.

On Mon, 2006-01-16 at 13:14 -0500, Brown, Len wrote:
> When we make GPL changes to those files, we diverge
> from the rest of the universe and the overloaded
> Linux/ACPI maintainer (me) starts to lose his sanity.
> That said, if the author of the patch re-licenses it back
> to Intel so it can be distributed under eitiher GPL or BSD,
> then Intel can apply a change "up-stream" and divergence
> can be avoided.  But per above, that isn't the primary
> issue with ripping out tracing.
> 
> Note that tracing is built in only for CONFIG_ACPI_DEBUG.

My main concern is that the ACPI subsystem uses obfuscating macros to
implement function tracing in the kernel. Please note that we do not
allow this in new code and there are janitor such as myself that are
working to remove the existing ones.

While I have no intention of making your life as Linux maintainer
harder, I would appreciate if you would at least consider ripping out
function tracing from upstream. I am certainly willing to relicense or
even transfer copyrights of the patch if that's what you need.

			Pekka


  reply	other threads:[~2006-01-16 18:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-01-16 18:14 [PATCH] acpi: remove function tracing macros Brown, Len
2006-01-16 18:45 ` Pekka Enberg [this message]
2006-01-19 13:36 ` Pavel Machek
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-01-16 20:01 Brown, Len
2006-01-19 13:38 ` Pavel Machek
2006-01-11 16:01 Pekka Enberg

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1137437119.10352.9.camel@localhost \
    --to=penberg@cs.helsinki.fi \
    --cc=len.brown@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox