Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-154855-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:4601:e00::3 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:4601:e00::3;
Message-ID: <14898c69-6a2e-4a9d-a0d4-d674087cd1ae@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2024 15:54:08 +0530
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] tracing/sched: sched_switch: place prev_comm and
 next_comm in right order
To: tiozhang@didiglobal.com
References: <20240417102840.GA6614@didi-ThinkCentre-M930t-N000>
Content-Language: en-US
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>, mhiramat@kernel.org,
        akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
        zyhtheonly@gmail.com, zyhtheonly@yeah.net,
        Madadi Vineeth Reddy <vineethr@linux.ibm.com>
From: Madadi Vineeth Reddy <vineethr@linux.ibm.com>
In-Reply-To: <20240417102840.GA6614@didi-ThinkCentre-M930t-N000>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hi Tio zhang,

On 17/04/24 15:59, Tio Zhang wrote:
> Switch the order of prev_comm and next_comm in sched_switch's code to
> align with its printing order.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Tio Zhang <tiozhang@didiglobal.com>
> ---
>  include/trace/events/sched.h | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/trace/events/sched.h b/include/trace/events/sched.h
> index dbb01b4b7451..a4bd4330db4c 100644
> --- a/include/trace/events/sched.h
> +++ b/include/trace/events/sched.h
> @@ -239,11 +239,11 @@ TRACE_EVENT(sched_switch,
>  	),
>  
>  	TP_fast_assign(
> -		memcpy(__entry->next_comm, next->comm, TASK_COMM_LEN);
> +		memcpy(__entry->prev_comm, prev->comm, TASK_COMM_LEN);
>  		__entry->prev_pid	= prev->pid;
>  		__entry->prev_prio	= prev->prio;
>  		__entry->prev_state	= __trace_sched_switch_state(preempt, prev_state, prev);
> -		memcpy(__entry->prev_comm, prev->comm, TASK_COMM_LEN);
> +		memcpy(__entry->next_comm, next->comm, TASK_COMM_LEN);
>  		__entry->next_pid	= next->pid;
>  		__entry->next_prio	= next->prio;
>  		/* XXX SCHED_DEADLINE */

Yes, makes sense to have all previous and then the next for increased readability.

Reviewed-by: Madadi Vineeth Reddy <vineethr@linux.ibm.com>