Em Wed, Sep 02, 2015 at 03:44:50PM +0200, Jiri Olsa escreveu: > On Wed, Sep 02, 2015 at 10:18:44AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > > Em Wed, Sep 02, 2015 at 09:56:36AM +0200, Jiri Olsa escreveu: > > > Making tracing_path__strerror_open_tp message generic by mentioning > > > > What means "making message generic"? What is the current behaviour you > > think is problematic. what is the new behaviour ad why do you think it > > is better? > > > > The test for ENOENT became confusing, i.e. since this was a test for > > "tracefs", if debugfs_configured() returned true, i.e. debugfs _was_ > > found in the system, then, the message makes sense, even if probably > > could be made better, i.e. isn't true that if CONFIG_DEBUGFS is > > configured and furthermore, debugfs_configure() returns true, then it > > should be something like CONFIG_TRACEFS that needs enabling? > > > > I applied all patches before this one, BTW. > > > > - Arnaldo > > > > > both debugfs/tracefs words in error message plus the tracing_path > > > instead of debugfs_mountpoint. > > > > > > Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/n/tip-5y7nboe2xe619hp649ry5...@git.kernel.org > > > Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa <jo...@kernel.org> > > > --- > > > tools/lib/api/fs/tracing_path.c | 20 ++++++++++---------- > > > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/tools/lib/api/fs/tracing_path.c > > > b/tools/lib/api/fs/tracing_path.c > > > index 3b3e4f5fc50b..b0ee3b3acef0 100644 > > > --- a/tools/lib/api/fs/tracing_path.c > > > +++ b/tools/lib/api/fs/tracing_path.c > > > @@ -90,33 +90,33 @@ static int strerror_open(int err, char *buf, size_t > > > size, const char *filename) > > > > > > switch (err) { > > > case ENOENT: > > > - if (debugfs_configured()) { > > > + if (debugfs_configured() || tracefs_configured()) { > > > snprintf(buf, size, > > > "Error:\tFile %s/%s not found.\n" > > > "Hint:\tPerhaps this kernel misses some > > > CONFIG_ setting to enable this feature?.\n", > > > - debugfs_mountpoint, filename); > > > + tracing_events_path, filename); > > > > Humm > > we will get here if we can't find the tracepoint, but one of > debugfs or tracefs is configured, which means you probably > want some tracepoint which wasn't compiled in your kernel > > before it did not take into account we could have tracefs configured > thats what other changes in here are about, to consider tracefs mount
Ok, that helps, will add the above as an comment. Somehow I was seeing this as not finding the mountpoints :-\ - Arnaldo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
