From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759654AbZFSDct (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Jun 2009 23:32:49 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753490AbZFSDcl (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Jun 2009 23:32:41 -0400 Received: from hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com ([71.74.56.124]:33534 "EHLO hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752264AbZFSDcl (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Jun 2009 23:32:41 -0400 Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 23:32:42 -0400 (EDT) From: Steven Rostedt X-X-Sender: rostedt@gandalf.stny.rr.com To: Li Zefan cc: Frederic Weisbecker , Jason Baron , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@elte.hu, laijs@cn.fujitsu.com, peterz@infradead.org, mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca, jiayingz@google.com, bligh@google.com, roland@redhat.com, fche@redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/7] add syscall tracepoints In-Reply-To: <4A3B028C.2040902@cn.fujitsu.com> Message-ID: References: <51b4e9aff767dac4933ebb7835dee7068b158db8.1244837725.git.jbaron@redhat.com> <20090619021418.GC7903@nowhere> <4A3B028C.2040902@cn.fujitsu.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (DEB 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 19 Jun 2009, Li Zefan wrote: > Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 05:24:59PM -0400, Jason Baron wrote: > >> update FTRACE_SYSCALL_MAX to the current number of syscalls > >> > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Jason Baron > >> > >> --- > >> arch/x86/include/asm/ftrace.h | 4 ++-- > >> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/ftrace.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/ftrace.h > >> index bd2c651..d16d195 100644 > >> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/ftrace.h > >> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/ftrace.h > >> @@ -30,9 +30,9 @@ > >> > >> /* FIXME: I don't want to stay hardcoded */ > > > > > > BTW, is there a way to know this size dynamically? > > Or is there already a hardcoded number of syscalls somewhere > > in x86? > > > > Does this patchset head for .31 or .32? If for .32, then this patch should > go into .31 I think. Probably the best to run it through tip for a release. So, yes this patch should go to the beginning of the queue so that we can push it to 31 if need be. -- Steve