On Wed, 16 Mar 2016, Luiz Capitulino wrote: > On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 11:29:13 -0500 > Luiz Capitulino <lcapitulino@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > This is just a repost of my RFC posting with no changes. > > I have tested it a bit more and I think it's good > > for inclusion. > > ping? > > > > > Original intro: > > > > In short, this series allows you to run cyclictest under > > trace-cmd and still get trace marks when the latency > > specified with -b is execeded. More details in patch 4/4. > > > > This series is RFC because I'm not completely sure this > > is the right thing to do. I'm wondering if we shouldn't > > ditch all tracing support from cyclictest... > > > > Luiz Capitulino (4): > > cyclictest: tracing(): check for notrace > > cyclictest: move debugfs init code to its own function > > cyclictest: move tracemark_fd handling to its own function > > cyclictest: add --tracemark option > > > > src/cyclictest/cyclictest.c | 62 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------- > > 1 file changed, 47 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) > > > > -- I'll have a closer look tomorrow, but these look okay. John -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rt-users" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
