From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933937AbaGWWAQ (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Jul 2014 18:00:16 -0400 Received: from mail-qa0-f50.google.com ([209.85.216.50]:55865 "EHLO mail-qa0-f50.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933437AbaGWWAO (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Jul 2014 18:00:14 -0400 Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2014 18:00:11 -0400 (EDT) From: Nicolas Pitre To: Steven Rostedt cc: Ingo Molnar , Daniel Lezcano , Russell King - ARM Linux , Catalin Marinas , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] (RFC) X86: add IPI tracepoints In-Reply-To: <20140721185459.54c81bd5@gandalf.local.home> Message-ID: References: <1405660735-13408-1-git-send-email-nicolas.pitre@linaro.org> <1405660735-13408-5-git-send-email-nicolas.pitre@linaro.org> <20140718162750.62cbf965@gandalf.local.home> <20140721185459.54c81bd5@gandalf.local.home> User-Agent: Alpine 2.11 (LFD 23 2013-08-11) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 21 Jul 2014, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Fri, 18 Jul 2014 16:59:50 -0400 (EDT) > Nicolas Pitre wrote: > > > On Fri, 18 Jul 2014, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > > > > On Fri, 18 Jul 2014 01:18:55 -0400 > > > Nicolas Pitre wrote: > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/smp.c b/arch/x86/kernel/smp.c > > > > index be8e1bde07..e154d176cf 100644 > > > > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/smp.c > > > > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/smp.c > > > > @@ -31,6 +31,12 @@ > > > > #include > > > > #include > > > > #include > > > > + > > > > +#define CREATE_TRACE_POINTS > > > > +#undef TRACE_INCLUDE_PATH > > > > +#undef TRACE_INCLUDE_FILE > > > > > > I'm curious to why you added the #undefs. I wouldn't think they were > > > needed. > > > > They are needed because asm/trace/irq_vectors.h included prior that > > point defines them for itself and that makes the inclusion of > > trace/events/ipi.h fail. > > > > Bah, I tried to get rid of the need for those, but it seems that the > macro magic is getting a bit out of hand. I need a new macro magic > hat :-p > > What you got here will have to do. OK. Now the real question: should I submit it for mainline? I'm a little bothered by the fact that all exception vectors already have tracepoints of their own, albeit deeply tied to X86 nomenclature. But nothing that relates to IPI sources. This patch fixes that by adding some tracepoints alongside existing ones which may go a long way in making their instrumentation with generic (arch independent) tools. What do people think? Nicolas