Re: [patch 4/4] KVM-trace port to tracepoints

From: Avi Kivity
Date: Wed Jul 23 2008 - 05:32:22 EST

Peter Zijlstra wrote:
There are currently no trace_mark() sites in the kernel that I'm aware
of (except for the scheduler :-/, and those should be converted to
tracepoints ASAP).

Andrew raised the whole point about trace_mark() generating an
user-visible interface and thus it should be stable, and I agree with

What that means is that trace_mark() can only be used for really stable

This in turn means we might as well use trace points.

Which allows for the conclusion that trace_mark() is not needed and
could be removed from the kernel.

However - it might be handy for ad-hoc debugging purposes that never see
the light of day (linus' git tree in this case). So on those grounds one
could argue against removing trace_mark

But trace_mark() is so wonderful. Can't we just declare the tracemarks as a non-stable interface?

Perhaps add an unstable_trace_mark() to make it clear.

error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at