Re: [PATCH 4/7] tracing: timer: Add deferrable flag to timer_start

[Ingo Molnar]

* John Stultz <john.stultz@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> From: Badhri Jagan Sridharan <badhri@xxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> The timer_start event now shows whether the timer is
> deferrable in case of a low-res timer. The debug_activate
> function now includes deferrable flag while calling
> trace_timer_start event.

s/now includes deferrable flag/
  now includes a deferrable flag

s/calling trace_timer_start event/
  calling the trace_timer_start event

>  TRACE_EVENT(timer_start,
>  
> -	TP_PROTO(struct timer_list *timer, unsigned long expires),
> +	TP_PROTO(struct timer_list *timer,
> +		unsigned long expires,

This isn't compat safe, should any tooling rely on this.

I see it's a mistake in prior code:

> +		unsigned int deferrable),
>  
> -	TP_ARGS(timer, expires),
> +	TP_ARGS(timer, expires, deferrable),
>  
>  	TP_STRUCT__entry(
>  		__field( void *,	timer		)
>  		__field( void *,	function	)
>  		__field( unsigned long,	expires		)
>  		__field( unsigned long,	now		)

which should probably be fixed as well.

> @@ -650,7 +650,8 @@ static inline void
>  debug_activate(struct timer_list *timer, unsigned long expires)
>  {
>  	debug_timer_activate(timer);
> -	trace_timer_start(timer, expires);
> +	trace_timer_start(timer, expires,
> +		tbase_get_deferrable(timer->base));

why is this line broken? If you put it into a single line it's still 
below 80 cols, so there's really no reason for it.

Thanks,

	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/