Re: [PATCH][GIT PULL] ftrace: Add function names to dangling } in function graph tracer

From: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Tim Bird <tim.bird@am.sony.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH][GIT PULL] ftrace: Add function names to dangling } in function graph tracer
Date: Sat, 27 Feb 2010 11:04:18 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100227100417.GC5130@nowhere> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100227094301.GC31794@elte.hu>

On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 10:43:01AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >      [tracing] cat trace
> >      # tracer: function_graph
> >      #
> >      # CPU  DURATION                  FUNCTION CALLS
> >      # |     |   |                     |   |   |   |
> >       0) + 91.897 us   |                  } (irq_exit)
> >       0) ! 567.961 us  |                } (smp_apic_timer_interrupt)
> >       0)   <========== |
> >       0) ! 579.083 us  |                _raw_spin_lock_irqsave();
> >       0)   4.694 us    |                _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore();
> >       0) ! 594.862 us  |              } (add_wait_queue)
> >       0) ! 603.361 us  |            } (__pollwait)
> >       0) ! 613.574 us  |          } (tcp_poll)
> >       0) ! 623.554 us  |        } (sock_poll)
> >       0)   3.653 us    |        fget_light();
> >       0)               |        sock_poll() {
> 
> Neat! I think it would read even more C-ish if it was something non-syntactic, 
> like:
> 
> >       0) ! 594.862 us  |              } /* add_wait_queue */
> >       0) ! 603.361 us  |            } /* __pollwait */
> >       0) ! 613.574 us  |          } /* tcp_poll */
> >       0) ! 623.554 us  |        } /* sock_poll */
> 
> hm?

Agreed. It won't even be confusing with other events that are
printed as comments, since we have the closing brace before.

> 
> 	Ingo