Re: Perf ABI versioning
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- Subject: Re: Perf ABI versioning
- From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2011 21:39:03 +0100
- Cc: Thomas Renninger <trenn@xxxxxxx>, tardyp@xxxxxxxxx, jean.pihet@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, acme@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-perf-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, mathieu.desnoyers@xxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-trace-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, LKML <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- In-reply-to: <20110124203449.GC2318@nowhere>
- References: <201101241704.01021.trenn@xxxxxxx> <20110124203449.GC2318@nowhere>
On Mon, 2011-01-24 at 21:34 +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>
> But instead of a global tracing ABI number, I would rather suggest
> one number per tracepoint subsystem (sched, power, etc...).
>
> Ideally it would be per event, but sometimes those events tend to be
> renamed or a whole tracepoint subsystem refactored (see workqueue
> lately). Hence it might be better per subsystem.
What's wrong with what we have? the /format file is pretty unique to
function as a version number of you use a hash over it.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-trace-users" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
[Index of Archives]
[Linux USB Development]
[Linux USB Development]
[Linux Audio Users]
[Yosemite Hiking]
[Linux Kernel]
[Linux SCSI]
