Re: [Crash-utility] [PATCH 0/2] extensions/trace: Sync up with v5.8 struct renaming

-----Original Message----- > 在 2020年09月04日 21:53, crash-utility-request(a)redhat.com 写道: >> Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2020 21:28:45 +0100 >> From: Valentin Schneider <valentin.schneider(a)arm.com&gt; >> To: crash-utility(a)redhat.com >> Subject: [Crash-utility] [PATCH 0/2] extensions/trace: Sync up with >> v5.8 struct renaming >> Message-ID: <20200903202847.31018-1-valentin.schneider(a)arm.com&gt; >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII >> >> Hi, >> >> Trying to use the trace extension on a mainline kernel doesn't work, and it >> stems from some struct renaming that has happened upstream. >> >> These two patches update the internal naming to match the upstream one, and >> includes some backwards-compatibility checks to figure out which naming version >> to use depending on what symbols are available. >> >> This was briefly tested on on both v5.4 and 5.9-rc1 kernels using QEMU's >> dump-guest-memory. The kernel starts tracing some sched & initicall stuff from >> boot, and "trace show" behaves just fine on both of these. >> >> Cheers, >> Valentin >> >> Valentin Schneider (2): >> extensions/trace: Rename trace_buffer to array_buffer >> extensions/trace: Rename ring_buffer to trace_buffer >> >> extensions/trace.c | 101 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------- >> 1 file changed, 63 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-) >> > Thanks for the fix. This series looks good to me. > > Acked-by: Lianbo Jiang <lijiang(a)redhat.com&gt; Thanks, applied. BTW, Lianbo, if you cannot find the original email and do reply to a digest, could you rename its subject to something distinguishable like "Re: <original subject>"?

That would be helpful for us to find which thread you replied: https://www.redhat.com/archives/crash-utility/2020-October/thread.html (It was hard for me to track discussion in August.. https://www.redhat.com/archives/crash-utility/2020-August/thread.html ) Thanks, Kazu