On Thu, 2009-11-26 at 14:44 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote: > Come to think of it, since current TRACE_EVENT is now just: > > #define TRACE_EVENT() \ > TRACE_EVENT_TEMPLATE() \ > DEFINE_EVENT > > This may make the most sense. I haven't tried it, but I believe that you > could even base other events off of the TRACE_EVENT. That is: > > TRACE_EVENT(x, ...); > > DEFINE_EVENT(x, y, ...); > > And y would use x as its class. > > So going back to your scheme of DECLARE_EVENT_CLASS(), it may make sense > to have DECLARE_AND_DEFINE_EVENT(). > > > DECLARE_EVENT_CLASS(class, ...); > DEFINE_EVENT(class, foo, ...); > > DECLARE_AND_DEFINE_EVENT(bar, ...); Perhaps being the most descriptive to what it does: DECLARE_CLASS_AND_DEFINE_EVENT() ? -- Steve > > DEFINE_EVENT(bar, zoo, ...); > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tip-commits" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
|