Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/7] tracing: Add __bitmask() macro to trace events to cpumasks and other bitmasks

2014-05-28 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Wed, 21 May 2014 09:26:41 +0100 Javi Merino wrote: > Hi Steve, > > On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 03:07:23AM +0100, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > Hmm, I didn't think about cross tree dependencies. I already pushed this > > patch to my for-next branch which is already in linux-next, and I do not > >

Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/7] tracing: Add __bitmask() macro to trace events to cpumasks and other bitmasks

2014-05-28 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Wed, 21 May 2014 09:26:41 +0100 Javi Merino javi.mer...@arm.com wrote: Hi Steve, On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 03:07:23AM +0100, Steven Rostedt wrote: Hmm, I didn't think about cross tree dependencies. I already pushed this patch to my for-next branch which is already in linux-next, and I do

Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/7] tracing: Add __bitmask() macro to trace events to cpumasks and other bitmasks

2014-05-21 Thread Javi Merino
Hi Steve, On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 03:07:23AM +0100, Steven Rostedt wrote: > Hmm, I didn't think about cross tree dependencies. I already pushed this > patch to my for-next branch which is already in linux-next, and I do not > rebase this branch unless there's a really good need to. > > I guess I

Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/7] tracing: Add __bitmask() macro to trace events to cpumasks and other bitmasks

2014-05-21 Thread Javi Merino
Hi Steve, On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 03:07:23AM +0100, Steven Rostedt wrote: Hmm, I didn't think about cross tree dependencies. I already pushed this patch to my for-next branch which is already in linux-next, and I do not rebase this branch unless there's a really good need to. I guess I

Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/7] tracing: Add __bitmask() macro to trace events to cpumasks and other bitmasks

2014-05-20 Thread Steven Rostedt
Hmm, I didn't think about cross tree dependencies. I already pushed this patch to my for-next branch which is already in linux-next, and I do not rebase this branch unless there's a really good need to. I guess I needed to make a separate branch that you could have pulled separately. I'm not sure

[RFC PATCH v2 1/7] tracing: Add __bitmask() macro to trace events to cpumasks and other bitmasks

2014-05-20 Thread Javi Merino
From: "Steven Rostedt (Red Hat)" Being able to show a cpumask of events can be useful as some events may affect only some CPUs. There is no standard way to record the cpumask and converting it to a string is rather expensive during the trace as traces happen in hotpaths. It would be better to

[RFC PATCH v2 1/7] tracing: Add __bitmask() macro to trace events to cpumasks and other bitmasks

2014-05-20 Thread Javi Merino
From: Steven Rostedt (Red Hat) rost...@goodmis.org Being able to show a cpumask of events can be useful as some events may affect only some CPUs. There is no standard way to record the cpumask and converting it to a string is rather expensive during the trace as traces happen in hotpaths. It

Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/7] tracing: Add __bitmask() macro to trace events to cpumasks and other bitmasks

2014-05-20 Thread Steven Rostedt
Hmm, I didn't think about cross tree dependencies. I already pushed this patch to my for-next branch which is already in linux-next, and I do not rebase this branch unless there's a really good need to. I guess I needed to make a separate branch that you could have pulled separately. I'm not sure