On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 9:17 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Aug 2013 20:34:58 -0300
> Lucas De Marchi wrote:
>
>
>> so in kcmdline we would have modulename.param instead of modulename.param=1?
>>
>> I guess we need to update kmod then, because currently we ignore and
>> treat this case
On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 10:00 PM, Lucas De Marchi
wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 9:17 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>> On Tue, 13 Aug 2013 20:34:58 -0300
>> Lucas De Marchi wrote:
>>
>>
>>> so in kcmdline we would have modulename.param instead of modulename.param=1?
>>>
>>> I guess we need to
On Tue, 13 Aug 2013 20:34:58 -0300
Lucas De Marchi wrote:
> so in kcmdline we would have modulename.param instead of modulename.param=1?
>
> I guess we need to update kmod then, because currently we ignore and
> treat this case as a wrong token. From a quick look, allowing it in
> kmod would
On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 6:02 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> Rusty,
>
> I'm looking at porting my "enable tracepoints in module load" patches
> and one of the comments you gave me (long ago) was to not have:
>
> trace_foo=1
>
> but to just have:
>
> trace_foo
>
> as a parameter name. I went and
On Tue, 13 Aug 2013 17:02:28 -0400
Steven Rostedt wrote:
> Rusty,
>
> I'm looking at porting my "enable tracepoints in module load" patches
> and one of the comments you gave me (long ago) was to not have:
>
> trace_foo=1
>
> but to just have:
>
> trace_foo
>
> as a parameter name. I went
Rusty,
I'm looking at porting my "enable tracepoints in module load" patches
and one of the comments you gave me (long ago) was to not have:
trace_foo=1
but to just have:
trace_foo
as a parameter name. I went and implemented this but discovered that the
functions that allow no arguments are
Rusty,
I'm looking at porting my enable tracepoints in module load patches
and one of the comments you gave me (long ago) was to not have:
trace_foo=1
but to just have:
trace_foo
as a parameter name. I went and implemented this but discovered that the
functions that allow no arguments are
On Tue, 13 Aug 2013 17:02:28 -0400
Steven Rostedt rost...@goodmis.org wrote:
Rusty,
I'm looking at porting my enable tracepoints in module load patches
and one of the comments you gave me (long ago) was to not have:
trace_foo=1
but to just have:
trace_foo
as a parameter name. I
On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 6:02 PM, Steven Rostedt rost...@goodmis.org wrote:
Rusty,
I'm looking at porting my enable tracepoints in module load patches
and one of the comments you gave me (long ago) was to not have:
trace_foo=1
but to just have:
trace_foo
as a parameter name. I went
On Tue, 13 Aug 2013 20:34:58 -0300
Lucas De Marchi lucas.de.mar...@gmail.com wrote:
so in kcmdline we would have modulename.param instead of modulename.param=1?
I guess we need to update kmod then, because currently we ignore and
treat this case as a wrong token. From a quick look,
On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 10:00 PM, Lucas De Marchi
lucas.de.mar...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 9:17 PM, Steven Rostedt rost...@goodmis.org wrote:
On Tue, 13 Aug 2013 20:34:58 -0300
Lucas De Marchi lucas.de.mar...@gmail.com wrote:
so in kcmdline we would have modulename.param
On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 9:17 PM, Steven Rostedt rost...@goodmis.org wrote:
On Tue, 13 Aug 2013 20:34:58 -0300
Lucas De Marchi lucas.de.mar...@gmail.com wrote:
so in kcmdline we would have modulename.param instead of modulename.param=1?
I guess we need to update kmod then, because currently
12 matches
Mail list logo
