> On Wed, 24 Jun 2015, Steven Rostedt wrote: >> > + >> > +#define show_chip_name(irq) \ >> > + (irq_get_irq_data(irq) \ >> > + ? irq_get_irq_data(irq)->chip->name \ >> > + : "NULL") >> > + >> > +#define show_hwirq(irq) \ >> > + (irq_get_irq_data(irq) \ >> > + ? irq_get_irq_data(irq)->hwirq \ >> > + : -ENODEV) >> >> Note these magic functions will only be useful for the tracefs reads of >> the trace files. Userspace tools that extract the data (like perf and >> trace-cmd), will have no idea of how to parse it. >> >> I'm not against doing this, but I'm just letting you know what the >> effect of this change will be. > > What's worse is, that they are racy against a concurrent teardown of > the interrupt. Not a good idea ... >
Agree, I'll save the chip-name and hwirq in the struct. This technique using the same macros to save the chip-name and hwirq in the struct also works well with trace-cmd. Thanks, Ankit and Gilad > Thanks, > > tglx > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" > in > the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
