Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754192AbZLBOzc (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Dec 2009 09:55:32 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753300AbZLBOzb (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Dec 2009 09:55:31 -0500 Received: from hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com ([71.74.56.125]:41977 "EHLO hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752408AbZLBOzb (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Dec 2009 09:55:31 -0500 Subject: Re: [tip:perf/core] tracing: Add DEFINE_EVENT(), DEFINE_SINGLE_EVENT() support to docbook From: Steven Rostedt Reply-To: rostedt@goodmis.org To: Ingo Molnar Cc: mingo@redhat.com, hpa@zytor.com, mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, randy.dunlap@oracle.com, wcohen@redhat.com, fweisbec@gmail.com, tglx@linutronix.de, jbaron@redhat.com, mhiramat@redhat.com, linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig In-Reply-To: <20091202144334.GA30359@elte.hu> References: <200912011718.nB1HIn7t011371@int-mx04.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com> <1259761934.12870.12.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> <20091202140128.GA2611@elte.hu> <1259764109.12870.37.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> <20091202144334.GA30359@elte.hu> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Kihon Technologies Inc. Date: Wed, 02 Dec 2009 09:55:35 -0500 Message-Id: <1259765735.12870.42.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.26.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1873 Lines: 56 On Wed, 2009-12-02 at 15:43 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Steven Rostedt wrote: > > > On Wed, 2009-12-02 at 15:01 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > > > DECLARE_CLASS_AND_DEFINE_EVENT() > > > > > > Hm, that's a bit too long. How about 'DEFINE_CLASS_EVENT()' as a > > > compromise? It's similarly short-ish to TRACE_EVENT(), and it also > > > conveys the fact that we create both a class and an event there. > > > > > > The full series would thus be: > > > > > > DECLARE_EVENT_CLASS > > > DEFINE_EVENT > > > DEFINE_CLASS_EVENT > > > > > > hm? > > > > I thought about that too, but it actually makes it more confusing. > > Because, looking at this with a fresh POV, I would think that after I > > declare a class, I would use DEFINE_CLASS_EVENT with that class. > > yeah. Hence was my second-best choice 'DEFINE_STANDALONE_EVENT' or > 'DEFINE_SINGLE_EVENT' - to stress the special nature it, and to actually > nudge people towards creating classes of events instead of doing > separate, standalone points. (which are a waste in the majority of > cases) But the current TRACE_EVENT is still defining a class. Thus, you could create a TRACE_EVENT (or whatever it is called) and then create DEFINE_EVENTs based on the TRACE_EVENT. That's why I want a name that describes this. DEFINE_EVENT_CLASS? Perhaps that's the best. DECLARE_EVENT_CLASS - only creates a class DEFINE_EVENT - defines an event based off of a class DEFINE_EVENT_CLASS - creates a class and defines an event by the same name Perhaps this is best in keeping with linux kernel naming conventions? -- Steve -- Steve -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/