Re: [patch 4/7] Linux Kernel Markers - Architecture Independent Code

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 02:43:09PM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> gcc doesn't like it if I put the attribute after the function in the
> implementation. Should I leave it before or separate the prototype from
> the implementation ?

Just keep it where it was.

> > There seem to be a lot of exports and some functions that don't seem
> > to be used by the obvious marker use-cases like your example, blktrace
> > or sputrace.  Care to explain why we'd really want them or better cut
> > them out for this first submission?
> 
> If you are referring to the exports you just told about in this email,
> I'll remove them, they are not needed. As for the "marker_get_iter" and
> friends, they are used to list the markers (I provide a /proc interface
> to list the markers in the subsequent modules and also use it to dump
> the marker list in a trace channel at trace start so I can later
> understand the event data by using the format strings as type
> identifiers).

Sounds conceptually fine, but can we introduce this together with
the actualy users?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/