On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 2:52 PM, Lluís Vilanova <[email protected]> wrote: > Stefan Hajnoczi writes: > >> On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 12:12 PM, Lluís Vilanova <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Stefan Hajnoczi writes: >>> >>>> On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 3:38 PM, Lluís Vilanova <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> Provides a generic event state description and a more detailed event >>>>> control and >>>>> query interface. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Lluís Vilanova <[email protected]> >>>>> --- >>> [...] >>>> What is the point of sstate vs dstate? It seems the dynamic state is >>>> what can be toggled and sstate is the "disable" keyword. Why have >>>> sstate since there is already a macro? >>> >>> 'sstate' is there just in case you query the tracing state of an event >>> through >>> the 'TraceEvent' structure instead of through the corresponding macro. > >> If this is not used by a tracer today we should hold off until it's needed. > > I double-checked the code for uses of that and it appears to be there just for > the sake of completeness. > > Still, I realized I should have added a check in > 'trace_event_set_state_dynamic' > and assert that the event is statically enabled (otherwise dynamically > enabling > an event that is statically disabled just does not make sense). > > Whatever you prefer, although the code is pretty simple.
I'd like to avoid adding things that are unused - even if they are small. Stefan
