On Mon, 27 Apr 2026 14:01:42 +0800
Bunyod Suvonov <[email protected]> wrote:

> +     TP_STRUCT__entry(
> +             __field(int, nid)
> +             __field(int, zid)
> +             __field(unsigned long, nr_pages)
> +     ),
> +
> +     TP_fast_assign(
> +             __entry->nid            = nid;
> +             __entry->zid            = zid;
> +             __entry->nr_pages       = nr_pages;
> +     ),
> +
> +     TP_printk("nid=%d zid=%d nr_pages=%lu",
> +             __entry->nid, __entry->zid, __entry->nr_pages)
> +);
> +
> +DEFINE_EVENT(mm_page_pcpu_zone_locked, mm_page_pcpu_refill_zone_locked,
> +
> +     TP_PROTO(int nid, int zid, unsigned long nr_pages),
> +
> +     TP_ARGS(nid, zid, nr_pages)
> +);
> +
> +DEFINE_EVENT(mm_page_pcpu_zone_locked, mm_page_pcpu_drain_zone_locked,
> +
> +     TP_PROTO(int nid, int zid, unsigned long nr_pages),
> +
> +     TP_ARGS(nid, zid, nr_pages)
> +);
> +
> +DECLARE_EVENT_CLASS(mm_page_pcpu,
>  
>       TP_PROTO(struct page *page, unsigned int order, int migratetype),
>  
>       TP_ARGS(page, order, migratetype),
>  
>       TP_STRUCT__entry(
> -             __field(        unsigned long,  pfn             )
> -             __field(        unsigned int,   order           )
> -             __field(        int,            migratetype     )
> +             __field(unsigned long, pfn)
> +             __field(unsigned int, order)
> +             __field(int, migratetype)

Why this change? It makes it much harder to understand.

The above is not a normal macro. Ignore any checkpatch warnings about it.
The proper way to do the TP_STRUCT__entry() is to make it just like a struct:

struct {
        unsigned long           pfn;
        unsigned int            order;
        int                     migratetype;
};

Thus, the macro should be:

        TP_STRUCT__entry(
                __field(        unsigned long,  pfn             )
                __field(        unsigned int,   order           )
                __field(        int,            migratetype     )
        ),

-- Steve



>       ),
>  

Reply via email to