Re: [for-next][PATCH 08/20] tracing: Warn if a tracepoint is not set via debugfs

[Steven Rostedt]

On Tue, 11 Mar 2014 04:08:27 +0000 (UTC)
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

 
> > That's my argument.
> 
> So basically, all we'd have to do in LTTng is to add a hash table tracking the
> tracepoint probes which are registered, but for which there are no
> tracepoint call sites. Whenever registration of a probe would fail due to
> -ENODEV (assuming we unregister the probe within tracepoint.c when we return
> -ENODEV, as you initially proposed), we would put this probe in the hash table.
> Upon module coming, we would iterate on the module's tracepoints and check
> if any of those match the content of the hash table, and then register the
> probe.
> 
> I guess I'd prefer that to the weird successful failure return value in
> tracepoint.c.
> 

OK, then I'll add back in the removal of the tracepoint on this error.
Then your LTTng module can handle the tracepoints that don't exist yet.

-- Steve
--
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/