On 10/21/2023 2:15 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote: >> Why are these needed to be changed at all? What code changes with it, >> and it's not mentioned in the changelog, so why is it required? > > Agreed, if this has issues, it probably should be a separate patch. As I mentioned to Greg, this fix is needed to avoid compiler warnings triggered by this patch. If I submitted this separately it would have to be merged first. Isn't it easier to combine them since this is not a functional change (it just makes a cast explicit)? >>> -#ifdef CONFIG_TRACEPOINTS >>> +#if defined(CONFIG_TRACEPOINTS) && !defined(DISABLE_TRACEPOINTS) >> >> Why this global change? > > Yeah, DISABLE_TRACEPOINTS does not currently exist. If this is to be a > new way to disable TRACEPOINTS it needs a separate patch and be able to > disable tracepoints everywhere (maybe include/trace/*.h files also need > to be modified?), and also be documented somewhere in Documentation/trace. It's only needed to suppress compiler errors when building arch/x86/boot/* and arch/x86/realmode/*. Those source files include various x86 headers such as <asm/msr.h> and <asm/shared/io.h>. Those x86 headers include <linux/tracepoint-defs.h> which references static_key_false() in <linux/jump_label.h>. DISABLE_TRACEPOINTS eliminates that reference and hence suppresses the compiler error. I didn't intend for this macro to be used by developers adding new tracepoints so I didn't document it as such. As far as creating a separate patch: again this is a requirement for this patch and it doesn't cause any functional changes so can't we combine them?
