On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 03:34:32PM +0900, Dongsheng Yang wrote: > On 05/13/2014 04:22 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > >* Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >>trace_sched_wakeup(.success) is a dead argument and has been for ages, > >Always 0, or random value? > > Hi Ingo, > > It is always 1 currently. > > Peter believe that .success is not useful and I pointed that perf sched > latency > is using it now. Then he post this patch to remove the usage here. > > Please go to the following link for more about this issue.
It is _not_ usable. You're proposing to abuse the existing parameter. A wakeup doing an enqueue or not has nothing _WHAT_SO_EVER_ to do with success. Now what I think you wanted to do is make it easier to match trace_sched_switch() statements with trace_sched_wakeup() statements. And since you only get the trace_sched_switch() on dequeue, you want to know which trace_sched_wakeup() calls did an enqueue. But that's completely and utterly unrelated to success.
pgp6UI8hUkXa9.pgp
Description: PGP signature
