On Wed, 14 May 2014 15:23:24 +0100
Javi Merino <javi.mer...@arm.com> wrote:
> > diff --git a/include/trace/ftrace.h b/include/trace/ftrace.h
> > index 0a1a4f7..d9c44af 100644
> > --- a/include/trace/ftrace.h
> > +++ b/include/trace/ftrace.h
> > @@ -53,6 +53,9 @@
> > #undef __string
> > #define __string(item, src) __dynamic_array(char, item, -1)
> >
> > +#undef __bitmask
> > +#define __bitmask(item, src) __dynamic_array(char, item, -1)
> > +
> > #undef TP_STRUCT__entry
> > #define TP_STRUCT__entry(args...) args
> >
> > @@ -128,6 +131,9 @@
> > #undef __string
> > #define __string(item, src) __dynamic_array(char, item, -1)
> >
> > +#undef __string
> > +#define __string(item, src) __dynamic_array(unsigned long, item, -1)
> > +
>
> This overrides the previous definition of __string() and looks like it
> shouldn't be here.
Bah! I knew there was a reason I didn't push this out to my for-next
branch yet. I can still rebase :-)
That should have been __bitmask(). Hmm, amazing it still worked.
>
> > #undef DECLARE_EVENT_CLASS
> > #define DECLARE_EVENT_CLASS(call, proto, args, tstruct, assign, print)
> > \
> > struct ftrace_data_offsets_##call { \
> > @@ -200,6 +206,15 @@
> > #undef __get_str
> > #define __get_str(field) (char *)__get_dynamic_array(field)
> >
> > +#undef __get_bitmask
> > +#define __get_bitmask(field)
> > \
> > + ({ \
> > + void *__bitmask = __get_dynamic_array(field); \
> > + unsigned int __bitmask_size; \
> > + __bitmask_size = (__entry->__data_loc_##field >> 16) & 0xffff; \
> > + ftrace_print_bitmask_seq(p, __bitmask, __bitmask_size); \
> > + })
> > +
> > #undef __print_flags
> > #define __print_flags(flag, delim, flag_array...) \
> > ({ \
> > @@ -322,6 +337,9 @@ static struct trace_event_functions
> > ftrace_event_type_funcs_##call = { \
> > #undef __string
> > #define __string(item, src) __dynamic_array(char, item, -1)
> >
> > +#undef __bitmask
> > +#define __bitmask(item, src) __dynamic_array(unsigned long, item, -1)
> > +
> >
> > #undef DECLARE_EVENT_CLASS
> > #define DECLARE_EVENT_CLASS(call, proto, args, tstruct, func, print)
> > \
> > static int notrace __init \
> > @@ -372,6 +390,29 @@ ftrace_define_fields_##call(struct ftrace_event_call
> > *event_call) \
> > #define __string(item, src) __dynamic_array(char, item,
> > \
> > strlen((src) ? (const char *)(src) : "(null)") + 1)
> >
> > +/*
> > + * __bitmask_size_in_bytes_raw is the number of bytes needed to hold
> > + * num_possible_cpus().
> > + */
> > +#define __bitmask_size_in_bytes_raw \
> > + ((num_possible_cpus() + 7) / 8)
> > +
> > +#define __bitmask_size_in_longs
> > \
> > + ((__bitmask_size_in_bytes_raw + ((BITS_PER_LONG / 8) - 1)) \
> > + / (BITS_PER_LONG / 8))
> > +
> > +/*
> > + * __bitmask_size_in_bytes is the number of bytes needed to hold
> > + * num_possible_cpus() padded out to the nearest long. This is what
> > + * is saved in the buffer, just to be consistent.
> > + */
> > +#define __bitmask_size_in_bytes \
> > + (__bitmask_size_in_longs * (BITS_PER_LONG / 8))
> > +
> > +#undef __bitmask
> > +#define __bitmask(item, src) __dynamic_array(unsigned long, item, \
> > + __bitmask_size_in_longs)
> > +
> > #undef DECLARE_EVENT_CLASS
> > #define DECLARE_EVENT_CLASS(call, proto, args, tstruct, assign, print)
> > \
> > static inline notrace int ftrace_get_offsets_##call(
> > \
> > @@ -513,12 +554,22 @@ static inline notrace int ftrace_get_offsets_##call(
> > \
> > __entry->__data_loc_##item = __data_offsets.item;
> >
> > #undef __string
> > -#define __string(item, src) __dynamic_array(char, item, -1) \
> > +#define __string(item, src) __dynamic_array(char, item, -1)
> >
> > #undef __assign_str
> > #define __assign_str(dst, src)
> > \
> > strcpy(__get_str(dst), (src) ? (const char *)(src) : "(null)");
> >
> > +#undef __bitmask
> > +#define __bitmask(item, src) __dynamic_array(unsigned long, item, -1)
>
> Why src? It's not used in any of the definitions of the __bitmask()
> macro, can we remove it?
Hmm, I may need to refactor this. I may pull this patch for now to push
the rest to for-next.
I just noticed that we need a way to specify the length of the bitmask.
Right now it's hardcoded as "num_possible_cpus", which Mathieu was
asking for a more generic approach.
OK, let me pull this patch out of my tree (thank god I never pushed
it), and work on it a bit more.
Thanks,
-- Steve
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
