Re: [RFC PATCH v2] meson: Only generate trace files for selected targets

[Claudio Fontana <cfontana@suse.de>]

On 3/8/21 6:48 PM, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> On 3/8/21 5:46 PM, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 10:35:15PM +0100, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
>>> We don't need to generate trace files for targets we
>>> are not building. Restrict the the ones selected.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@redhat.com>
>>> ---
>>>  meson.build | 16 ++++++++--------
>>>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/meson.build b/meson.build
>>> index 05a67c20d93..8503aa1b628 100644
>>> --- a/meson.build
>>> +++ b/meson.build
>>> @@ -1826,16 +1826,16 @@
>>>    trace_events_subdirs += [
>>>      'accel/tcg',
>>>      'hw/core',
>>> -    'target/arm',
>>> -    'target/hppa',
>>> -    'target/i386',
>>>      'target/i386/kvm',
>>
>> Please add a comment explaining why an exception is needed here and the
>> rest of the target directories are handled by the loop below when you
>> send a non-RFC patch.
> 
> Better would be a recursive function that adds the directory if
> necessary. But I'm happy adding a simple comment =)
> 
>>
>> That will help people who add sub-directories in the future.
> 
> Yes. Anyhow I expect this to clash with Claudio's work in progress
> (which split target/ and add multiple subdirectories).
> 
> 

np, just the tracedirs should be easy to solve;

I personally don't see updating a simple list as difficult for the dev; does generating trace files for all require a lot of time?

In any case, I agree that just recursing all directories in target/ looking for trace.h / traceevents files could be better.

But how much time do we spare, compared with just generating all?

Ciao,

Claudio