>>> On 09.06.17 at 13:17, <dario.faggi...@citrix.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 2017-06-09 at 04:59 -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> > > > On 01.06.17 at 19:35, <dario.faggi...@citrix.com> wrote:
>> > --- a/xen/common/tasklet.c
>> > +++ b/xen/common/tasklet.c
>> > @@ -30,10 +30,87 @@ static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct list_head,
>> > [...]
>
>> > +#else
>> >
>> > +#define trace_enqueue(t) do {} while ( 0 )
>> > +#define trace_schedule(t) do {} while ( 0 )
>> > +#define trace_work(t) do {} while ( 0 )
>> > +#define trace_kill(t) do {} while ( 0 )
>> > +#define trace_migrate() do {} while ( 0 )
>> > +#define trace_init(t) do {} while ( 0 )
>> > +#endif /* TRACE_TASKLETS */
>>
>> Seeing how such additions add up, I think I'd prefer if you put them
>> into header files instead of cluttering source files this way. You
>> could have one such header per traceable component.
>>
> Right, good point.
>
> As a matter of fact, the components dealt with in this series, have
> their own header already, such as:
>
> xen/include/xen/rcupdate.h
> xen/include/xen/timer.h
> xen/include/xen/softirq.h
> xen/include/xen/tasklet.h
>
> I guess I can put these there?
No, please don't - these definitions don't need to be seen by
everyone including these headers. Instead I'd like to suggest
having a separate trace/ directory where they could all go (at
once eliminating the need to prefix their names with e.g.
trace_).
Jan
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
