On Wed, 17 Dec 2025 18:29:15 -0800 Andrew Morton <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Dec 2025 15:52:18 -0800 SeongJae Park <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Wed, 17 Dec 2025 17:48:51 -0500 Steven Rostedt <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > On Tue, 16 Dec 2025 00:01:25 -0800 > > > SeongJae Park <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > + TP_printk("ctx_idx=%u scheme_idx=%u nr_tried=%lu sz_tried=%lu " > > > > + "nr_applied=%lu sz_tried=%lu > > > > sz_ops_filter_passed=%lu " > > > > + "qt_exceeds=%lu nr_snapshots=%lu", > > > > > > Nit, but it's been stated that strings should not be broken up because of > > > the column limit. > > screw the rules > > > --- a/include/trace/events/damon.h > > +++ b/include/trace/events/damon.h > > @@ -40,9 +40,7 @@ TRACE_EVENT(damos_stat_after_apply_interval, > > __entry->nr_snapshots = stat->nr_snapshots; > > ), > > > > - TP_printk("ctx_idx=%u scheme_idx=%u nr_tried=%lu sz_tried=%lu " > > - "nr_applied=%lu sz_tried=%lu sz_ops_filter_passed=%lu " > > - "qt_exceeds=%lu nr_snapshots=%lu", > > + TP_printk("ctx_idx=%u scheme_idx=%u nr_tried=%lu sz_tried=%lu > > nr_applied=%lu sz_tried=%lu sz_ops_filter_passed=%lu qt_exceeds=%lu > > nr_snapshots=%lu", > > __entry->context_idx, __entry->scheme_idx, > > __entry->nr_tried, __entry->sz_tried, > > __entry->nr_applied, __entry->sz_applied, > > because that's just crazy. Let's use some judgment here! I'm fine with either direction. So I understand you want to just keep the original patch without this fixup, and therefore no action is needed from my side? Let me know if I'm getting anything wrong. Thanks, SJ [...]
