From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757064AbXGECA3 (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Jul 2007 22:00:29 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754398AbXGECAV (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Jul 2007 22:00:21 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:47461 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752909AbXGECAU (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Jul 2007 22:00:20 -0400 To: Mathieu Desnoyers Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, Christoph Hellwig , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [patch 0/4] Linux Kernel Markers References: <20070703170843.204442953@polymtl.ca> From: fche@redhat.com (Frank Ch. Eigler) Date: 04 Jul 2007 22:00:01 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20070703170843.204442953@polymtl.ca> Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) Emacs/21.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Mathieu Desnoyers writes: > This updated version of the Linux Kernel Markers mostly adds a unique 16 bits > per marker ID and a per-probe marker group. [...] Could you motivate this part better? It is not covered in the documentation patch. It seems to be a way of having a marker handling (callback) module give alternate names/ids to markers. If so, why, considering that there is already a private void* callback parameter available to pass data back to itself through? Also, what if different marker handling modules want to set different id/group numbers on the same set of markers? - FChE