Hi Daniel,
On 30 August 2016 at 17:00, Daniel Wagner <daniel.wag...@bmw-carit.de> wrote:
> Hi Binoy,
>
>
> As Masami has pointed out, the prefix trace_ should not be used. Also having
> trace_latency_ and latency_trace_ is kind of confusing. What about
> {start|stop}_latency_timing()? It would match the existing
> {start|stop}_critical_timing(). Or is it too close and it leads to
> confusion?
>
> Another idea is {start|stop}_latency_preempt(). This matches the
> trace_latency_preempt_enable() function.
>
Sure, I'll make this change. And how about the 'cpu' field not being
available to be used
as a key field or as a value field when we do not define it explicitly
(mentioned in the
other email). Can we live with that ?
Thanks,
Binoy
