From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To: Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, fweisbec@gmail.com,
mingo@redhat.com, Mathieu Desnoyers <compudj@krystal.dyndns.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix tracing infrastructure to support multiple includes when defining CREATE_TRACE_POINTS
Date: Thu, 03 Dec 2009 14:42:01 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1259869321.12870.145.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20091203193549.GA18664@hmsreliant.think-freely.org>
On Thu, 2009-12-03 at 14:35 -0500, Neil Horman wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 03, 2009 at 09:15:26AM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > On Wed, 2009-12-02 at 14:19 -0500, Neil Horman wrote:
> > > Fix tracing infrastructure to allow multiple header files with TRACE_EVENTS to
> > > be included with CREATE_TRACE_EVENTS defined
> > >
> > > I've been workingon adding a few tracepoints to the network stack, and in so
> > > doing it was convienient for me to add a second include file to
> > > net/core/net-traces.c with TRACE_EVENTS defined in them. net-traces.c defines
> > > CREATE_TRACE_EVENTS, and during the build it was failing, complaining about
> > > duplicate definitions of __tpstrtab_<name>. I tracked down the bug to find that
> > > define_trace.h redefined DECLARE_TRACE to be DEFINE_TRACE, so after the first
> > > run through define_trace.h (which is included from skb.h, included in
> > > net-trace.c first), the DECLARE_TRACE macro was left with an improper definition
> > > to start a new cycle with the next header.
> > >
> > > The fix I came up with was to make sure that DECLARE_TRACE was undefined at the
> > > end of define_trace.h, and to add a conditional re-definition in tracepoint.h.
> > > This places us back in the proper state to define a new set of tracepoints in a
> > > subsequent header file. Not sure if theres a better way to handle this, but
> > > this worked well for me, allowing me to include multiple headers with
> > > TRACE_EVENT macros in a c file with CREATE_TRACE_POINTS defined.
> > >
> >
> > Nice, just some comments below.
> ><snip>
> >
> > You duplicate the DECLARE_TRACE from above and place it into an
> > unprotected area. Why not move it instead of duplicating it. This is
> > just a bug waiting to happen if we ever need to modify DECLARE_TRACE.
> >
> > If you change it to:
> >
> > #if !defined(CONFIG_TRACEPOINTS) && !defined(DECLARE_TRACE)
> >
> > #define DECLARE_TRACE(...) ....
> >
> > #endif
> >
> > Then you can remove the first definition of it. The first time
> > processing the file, when it hits the #ifndef DECLARE_TRACE in the
> > _LINUX_TRACEPOINT_H conditional, it still does not define DECLARE_TRACE,
> > and then when it exits that conditional, it does.
>
>
> Yeah, that makes sense to me. Although I think you mean if
> defined(CONFIG_TRACEPOINTS) rather than if !defined(CONFIG_TRACEPOINTS). The
Yep, that's what I meant ;-)
> case I'm moving to outside the unprotected area is the one that we use if
> tracepoints are enabled. I just tested this new patch, and it works well for
> me. Thanks!
>
> Neil
>
> Signed-off-by: Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>
OK, I'll give it some testing tonight.
-- Steve
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-12-03 19:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-12-02 19:19 Neil Horman
2009-12-03 14:15 ` Steven Rostedt
2009-12-03 19:35 ` Neil Horman
2009-12-03 19:42 ` Steven Rostedt [this message]
2009-12-07 20:04 ` Steven Rostedt
2009-12-07 20:18 ` Neil Horman
2009-12-07 20:47 ` Steven Rostedt
2009-12-07 20:49 ` Steven Rostedt
2009-12-07 20:53 ` Neil Horman
2009-12-14 19:50 ` Neil Horman
2009-12-15 16:08 ` Neil Horman
2009-12-16 4:13 ` Steven Rostedt
2009-12-16 11:49 ` Neil Horman
2009-12-16 16:04 ` Neil Horman
2009-12-22 18:03 ` Steven Rostedt
2009-12-23 12:02 ` Neil Horman
2009-12-23 13:58 ` Steven Rostedt
2009-12-23 18:36 ` Neil Horman
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1259869321.12870.145.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com \
--to=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=compudj@krystal.dyndns.org \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=nhorman@tuxdriver.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®