Re: [PATCH 0/8] [GIT PULL] TRACE_EVENT for modules

Steven Rostedt
2009-04-14T18:35:20Z

On Tue, 14 Apr 2009, Ingo Molnar wrote:

>
> * Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:
>
> > include/trace/define_trace.h | 79 ++++++
> > include/trace/ftrace.h | 493 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > include/trace/irq.h | 56 ++++-
> > include/trace/irq_event_types.h | 55 ----
> > include/trace/kmem.h | 189 +++++++++++++-
> > include/trace/lockdep.h | 55 ++++-
> > include/trace/lockdep_event_types.h | 57 ----
> > include/trace/sched.h | 336 +++++++++++++++++++++++-
> > include/trace/sched_event_types.h | 337 ------------------------
> > include/trace/skb.h | 39 +++-
> > include/trace/skb_event_types.h | 38 ---
> > include/trace/trace_event_types.h | 7 -
> > include/trace/trace_events.h | 7 -
>
> Detail: we still have include/trace/kmem_event_types.h around - is
> that intentional? It isnt actually used by anything so we can git-rm
> it.

I rebased it several times, doing minor tweaks and such. I think I may
have missed a git-rm. That file is suppose to be deleted.

>
> Also, we mix tracepoint definition headers with other misc headers
> such as syscall.h or boot.h.
>
> I think it would be cleaner and better sructured to have these
> centrally enumerated tracepoint definitions separated in
> include/trace/events/.
>
> That sub-directory would _only_ include the TRACE_EVENT()
> definitions - nothing else. Hence it would also be a nice in-situ
> template collection for anyone adding new tracepoints. The existence
> of other headers really distracts from that.
>
> What do you think?

I'm fine with that. As long as people are fine with doing:

#include <trace/events/sched.h>

and such.

-- Steve