* Frédéric Weisbecker <fweisbec@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > But they should be able to use the tracing for several other tracers. > One other problem is that you need CONFIG_TRACE_IRQFLAGS (is that a > lockdep or just trace feature?) to use any tracer since the > tracing_cpumask file is always created for all tracer. This file has > tracing_cpumask_write() as a write operation, and this func uses > raw_local_funcs.... > > Perhaps we should disable the tracing_cpu_mask related things if > TRACE_IRQFLAGS in not configured? to answer the "is that a lockdep or just trace feature" question: trace-irqflags was first written by me for the (crude) ftrace-precursor latency tracer code in -rt, years ago. Then i reused it (and changed it alot) for upstream lockdep, two years ago. Then ftrace came in this year and reused it. so it's rather symbiotic ;-) So ... the tracers that rely on irqflags-tracing should definitely be limited to architectures that provide TRACE_IRQFLAGS. The core trace.c itself should probably not be restricted ... (and it should definitely build) Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
