From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2708BC433FE for ; Wed, 5 Oct 2022 21:11:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231185AbiJEVLh (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Oct 2022 17:11:37 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:40854 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230346AbiJEVLe (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Oct 2022 17:11:34 -0400 Received: from dfw.source.kernel.org (dfw.source.kernel.org [IPv6:2604:1380:4641:c500::1]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CBF25220FD; Wed, 5 Oct 2022 14:11:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dfw.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 67683617B6; Wed, 5 Oct 2022 21:11:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 01348C433D6; Wed, 5 Oct 2022 21:11:31 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2022 17:11:36 -0400 From: Steven Rostedt To: Guenter Roeck Cc: Uwe =?UTF-8?B?S2xlaW5lLUvDtm5pZw==?= , linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar , kernel@pengutronix.de, Wim Van Sebroeck Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] watchdog: Add tracing events for the most usual watchdog events Message-ID: <20221005171136.1a5e6673@gandalf.local.home> In-Reply-To: <20221005193924.GA3237208@roeck-us.net> References: <20221004091950.3419662-1-u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de> <20221004185146.5d4419ba@gandalf.local.home> <20221005071946.blttrgv2s5amnrrj@pengutronix.de> <20221005193924.GA3237208@roeck-us.net> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.17.8 (GTK+ 2.24.33; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 5 Oct 2022 12:39:24 -0700 Guenter Roeck wrote: > > > Nit, but I would probably put the above TRACE_EVENT() below the two > > > DEFINE_EVENT()s below. That way we have all the DEFINE_EVENT()s for a > > > specific DECLARE_EVENT_CLASS() together. Otherwise people may get confused. > > > > I thought about that, too. The argument for the order I chose is that > > having start at the start and stop at the end is also intuitive. > > > > But I don't care much and would let the watchdog guys decide what they > > prefer. > > > > @Wim+Guenter: Feel free to reorder at application time or ask for a v3 > > if this v2 doesn't fit your preference. > > For my part I would prefer a version with Steven's Reviewed-by: tag, > whatever it is. I much rather have the DEFINE_EVENTS followed by the DECLARE_EVENT_CLASS() as that's what most people look for. For start and stop being together, I believe that will not trip many people up, where as the DEFINE_EVENTS() scattering will. I'm OK if maintainers of the code are fine with the scattering, but it will break precedence. -- Steve