Re: [PATCH 00/11] [GIT PULL] more updates for the tag format

[Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>]

* Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:

> 
> Ingo,
> 
> Please pull the latest tip/tracing/event-print-format tree, which can be found at:
> 
>   git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rostedt/linux-2.6-trace.git
> tip/tracing/event-print-format
> 
> 
> Li Zefan (1):
>       tracing/events: convert block trace points to TRACE_EVENT(), fix
> 
> Steven Rostedt (10):
>       tracing: add nsec2sec print formats
>       tracing: convert lockdep lock_acquired trace point to use nsec2usec tag
>       tracing: add major and minor tags for print format
>       tracing: use << to print < instead of \<
>       tracing: convert the block trace points to use the new tag format
>       tracing: add test for strings in event tag format
>       tracing: add func and symfunc to tag format
>       tracing: check full name for field
>       tracing: update sample code with new tag format
>       tracing: move '>' to out of macros and into print statement
> 
> ----
>  include/linux/blktrace_api.h               |    4 +-
>  include/linux/ftrace_event.h               |    3 +-
>  include/trace/events/block.h               |  101 +++------
>  include/trace/events/irq.h                 |    8 +-
>  include/trace/events/kmem.h                |   12 +-
>  include/trace/events/lockdep.h             |    8 +-
>  include/trace/ftrace.h                     |    2 +-
>  kernel/trace/trace_output.c                |    2 +-
>  kernel/trace/trace_output.h                |    4 +
>  kernel/trace/trace_read_binary.c           |  304 +++++++++++++++++++++++-----
>  samples/trace_events/trace-events-sample.c |   21 ++-
>  samples/trace_events/trace-events-sample.h |   66 ++++++
>  12 files changed, 399 insertions(+), 136 deletions(-)

Hm, that's way too much back and forth really - trivial typo fixes, 
build failure, etc. This is really a 'oh, the merge window is 
coming' last minute scrambling and we dont want to mess up the 
squeaky-clean tracing tree history be messed up with this.

Frederic also expressed worries about the tag format. Could we have 
a wider buy-in for this format?

I've separated these bits into tip:tracing/ftrace, and kept 
tip:tracing/core on a pre-print-formats state (going back 8 
commits), so that upstream merging of the other bits does not get 
held up.

Could we try a cleaner, bisectable, consiously built up version of 
these final tracing/core..tracing/ftrace please? I think we can - 
the rest of the tree is clean. Please do a exact-same-content rebase 
so that the merge back gets obvious and that the testing we've 
injected does not get invalidated?

	Ingo