On Wednesday, October 19, 2016 05:26:09 PM Brian Norris wrote: > From: Douglas Anderson <diand...@chromium.org> > > The printouts writen to the logs by suspend can be a bit opaque: it can > be hard to track them down to the actual function called. You might > see: > > calling rfkill1+ @ 19473, parent: phy0 > call rfkill1+ returned 0 after 1 usecs > calling phy0+ @ 19473, parent: mmc2:0001:1 > call phy0+ returned 0 after 19 usecs > > It's a bit hard to know what's actually happening. Instead, it's nice > to see: > > calling rfkill1+ @ 15793, parent: phy0, cb: rfkill_suspend > call rfkill1+ returned 0 after 1 usecs > calling phy0+ @ 15793, parent: mmc2:0001:1, cb: wiphy_suspend [cfg80211] > call phy0+ returned 0 after 7 usecs > > That makes it very obvious what's going on. It also has the nice side > effect of making the suspend/resume spew a little more obvious, since > many resume functions have the word "resume" in the name: > > calling phy0+ @ 15793, parent: mmc2:0001:1, cb: wiphy_resume [cfg80211] > call phy0+ returned 0 after 12 usecs > calling rfkill1+ @ 15793, parent: phy0, cb: rfkill_resume > call rfkill1+ returned 0 after 1 usecs > > Signed-off-by: Douglas Anderson <diand...@chromium.org> > Acked-by: Pavel Machek <pa...@ucw.cz> > Signed-off-by: Brian Norris <briannor...@chromium.org>
Any reason why you need to rely on the initcall_debug stuff instead of using the tracepoints we have there (for exactly the reason why you are pushing this patch)? Thanks, Rafael
