On 2017/03/02 08:38PM, Michael Ellerman wrote: > Steven Rostedt <rost...@goodmis.org> writes: > > > On Tue, 28 Feb 2017 15:04:15 +1100 > > Michael Ellerman <m...@ellerman.id.au> wrote: > > > > kernel/trace/ftrace.c more obvious. > >> > >> I don't know if it's really worth keeping the names the same across > >> arches, especially as we already have: > >> > >> arch/arm64/kernel/entry-ftrace.S > >> arch/arm/kernel/entry-ftrace.S > >> arch/blackfin/kernel/ftrace-entry.S > >> arch/metag/kernel/ftrace_stub.S > >> > >> But we can rename it if you feel strongly about it. > > > > Hmm, perhaps "entry-ftrace.S" would be the better name. I never liked > > the "mcount.S" name. > > Except what does the "entry" part mean? > > Traditionally entry.S has been for the code that "enters" the kernel, > ie. from userspace or elsewhere. But that's not the case with any of the > ftrace code, it's kernel code called from the kernel. So using "entry" > is a bit wrong IMHO. > > So if we drop that we're left with ftrace.S - which seems perfect to me.
Hi Steve, Are you ok with this? I'd prefer to not add the 'entry-' prefix too, seeing as it will make the file names quite long without necessarily adding much. Thanks, Naveen
