On 18.07.2019 16:00, Andrew Cooper wrote: > Use bool rather than int/bool_t for 'cycles' to match the !CONFIG_TRACEBUFFER > version, and use unsigned int rather than int for 'extra' to match the > function it is forwarded to. > > Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.coop...@citrix.com>
Acked-by: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com> albeit I'd have expected the file to by part of the XENTRACE section of ./MAINTAINERS. > --- a/xen/include/xen/trace.h > +++ b/xen/include/xen/trace.h > @@ -41,9 +41,9 @@ int tb_control(struct xen_sysctl_tbuf_op *tbc); > > int trace_will_trace_event(u32 event); > > -void __trace_var(u32 event, bool_t cycles, unsigned int extra, const void *); > +void __trace_var(u32 event, bool cycles, unsigned int extra, const void *); > > -static inline void trace_var(u32 event, int cycles, int extra, > +static inline void trace_var(u32 event, bool cycles, unsigned int extra, > const void *extra_data) Would be nice if the u32-s here could go away at the same time. Ideally they'd become unsigned int, but I guess you're once again rather seeing them be uint32_t. Also wouldn't you better adjust __trace_var()'s definition as well at this occasion? Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
