Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Tue, 12 Oct 2021 11:34:04 -0400
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To:     Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] s390: DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_DIRECT_CALL support
Message-ID: <20211012113404.29ac7c9c@gandalf.local.home>
In-Reply-To: <YWWithSCGThguq7s@osiris>
References: <20211012133802.2460757-1-hca@linux.ibm.com>
        <20211012094852.7f6a59b8@gandalf.local.home>
        <YWWithSCGThguq7s@osiris>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, 12 Oct 2021 16:59:02 +0200
Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com> wrote:

> One thing to note: Jiri adds a new a sample module, which obviously
> will not compile for s390. Not sure if the config mechanism I propose
> with this patch set is the best way to address this - it would then
> require to add a config option for each new sample module.

Is that really an issue?

We could just group them, as long as they have the same prefix.

HAVE_SAMPLE_FTRACE_DIRECT
HAVE_SAMPLE_FTRACE_MULTI_DIRECT

??

-- Steve