Re: [PATCH] perf events: Remove CONFIG_EVENT_PROFILE

[Ingo Molnar]

* Li Zefan <lizf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Quote from Ingo:
> 
> | This reminds me - i think we should eliminate CONFIG_EVENT_PROFILE -
> | it's an unnecessary Kconfig complication. If both PERF_EVENTS and
> | EVENT_TRACING is enabled we should expose generic tracepoints.
> |
> | Nor is it limited to event 'profiling', so it has become a misnomer as
> | well.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Li Zefan <lizf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  include/linux/ftrace_event.h       |    2 +-
>  include/linux/perf_event.h         |    2 +-
>  include/linux/syscalls.h           |    4 ++--
>  include/trace/ftrace.h             |   12 ++++++------
>  include/trace/syscall.h            |    4 ++--
>  init/Kconfig                       |   13 -------------
>  kernel/perf_event.c                |    4 ++--
>  kernel/trace/Makefile              |    4 +++-
>  kernel/trace/trace_events_filter.c |    4 ++--
>  kernel/trace/trace_kprobe.c        |   14 +++++++-------
>  kernel/trace/trace_syscalls.c      |    4 ++--
>  11 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 39 deletions(-)

Thanks!

There's a logistical complication: this rename couples the pending perf 
tree with the pending tracing tree and that makes dependencies a bit 
awkward.

Would you mind to resend this patch in the merge window, to be merged 
soon after both the perf events and the tracing tree went uptream?

The rename/elimination itself looks fine and simple and shouldnt break 
anything, so we dont need to have it in the tracing and perf trees for 
long.

	Ingo
--
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/