On Tue, 16 Jun 2009, Marcelo Tosatti wrote: > > > > > > One suggestion. Instead of putting in arch specific trace points into > > generic code, you can put these into arch/x86/kvm/trace.h ? > > > > Then you can in the Makefile add: > > > > CFLAGS_x86.o := -I. > > CFLAGS_svm.o := -I. > > CFLAGS_vmx.o := -I. > > > > Or better yet, have a single file called trace.c: > > > > in the Makefile: > > CFLAGS_trace.o := -I. > > obj-$(EVENT_TRACING) += trace.o > > > > in trace.c: > > > > #define CREATE_TRACE_POINTS > > #include "trace.h" > > #include "trace-arch.h" > > > > > > Then have the kvm/x86.h moved to trace.h > > and the kvm/arch-x86.h move to trace-arch.h > > > > Just change the "TRACE_INCLUDE_FILE" to include the proper name. > > > > -- Steve > > Similar to http://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/23829/, but moving the > x86 tracepoint definitions to arch/x86/kvm/ ? Yes, similar to what Christoph suggested. > > I thought the point of include/trace/ was to have all tracepoints > definitions in a single directory? > That's not what I heard ;-) It should only be for core kernel code. If you have trace points that are the same on most archs, then sure. But if it is specific to one arch, then we are going to end up with arch code scattered through out the kernel again. I thought the idea of moving include/asm-x86 into arch/x86/include/asm was to consolidate arch code to one location? Thus, if a trace point is made for one arch, then it should be located in that arch. -- Steve -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
