It has happened more than once that patches that look perfectly sane
and work with simpletrace broke systemtap because they use 'next' as an
argument name for a tracing function. However, 'next' is a keyword for
systemtap, so we shouldn't use it.
Signed-off-by: Kevin Wolf kw...@redhat.com
---
On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 9:34 AM, Kevin Wolf kw...@redhat.com wrote:
It has happened more than once that patches that look perfectly sane
and work with simpletrace broke systemtap because they use 'next' as an
argument name for a tracing function. However, 'next' is a keyword for
systemtap, so
Am 12.03.2012 12:01, schrieb Stefan Hajnoczi:
On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 9:34 AM, Kevin Wolf kw...@redhat.com wrote:
It has happened more than once that patches that look perfectly sane
and work with simpletrace broke systemtap because they use 'next' as an
argument name for a tracing function.
Stefan Hajnoczi writes:
On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 9:34 AM, Kevin Wolf kw...@redhat.com wrote:
It has happened more than once that patches that look perfectly sane
and work with simpletrace broke systemtap because they use 'next' as an
argument name for a tracing function. However, 'next' is a
