From: Johannes Sixt <j6t@kdbg.org>
Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2017 08:27:03 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Reduce performance cost of the trace if trace category is disabled
Message-ID: <d9076fef-c90c-63f2-5e0e-37293810e3d9@kdbg.org>
In-Reply-To: <20171119004247.22792-2-gennady.kupava@gmail.com>

Am 19.11.2017 um 01:42 schrieb gennady.kupava@gmail.com:
> +#define trace_printf_key(key, ...)					    \
> +	do {								    \
> +		if (trace_pass_fl(key))					    \
> +			trace_printf_key_fl(TRACE_CONTEXT, __LINE__, key,   \
> +					    __VA_ARGS__);		    \
> +	} while(0)
> +
> +#define trace_printf(...) trace_printf_key(&trace_default_key, __VA_ARGS__);
> +
> +#define trace_argv_printf(argv, ...)					    \
> +	do {								    \
> +		if (trace_pass_fl(&trace_default_key))			    \
> +		       trace_argv_printf_fl(TRACE_CONTEXT, __LINE__,	    \
> +					    argv, __VA_ARGS__);		    \
> +	} while(0)
> +
> +#define trace_strbuf(key, data)						    \
> +	do {								    \
> +		if (trace_pass_fl(key))					    \
> +			trace_strbuf_fl(TRACE_CONTEXT, __LINE__, key, data);\
> +	} while(0)
> +
> +#define trace_performance(nanos, ...)					    \
> +	do {								    \
> +		if (trace_pass_fl(key))					    \

The token "key" here looks suspicious. Did you mean &trace_perf_key?

> +			trace_performance_fl(TRACE_CONTEXT, __LINE__, nanos,\
> +					     __VA_ARGS__);  		    \
> +	} while(0)
> +
> +#define trace_performance_since(start, ...)				    \
> +	do {								    \
> +		if (trace_pass_fl(&trace_perf_key))			    \
> +			trace_performance_fl(TRACE_CONTEXT, __LINE__,       \
> +					     getnanotime() - (start),	    \
> +					     __VA_ARGS__);		    \
> +	} while(0)
>   
>   /* backend functions, use non-*fl macros instead */
>   __attribute__((format (printf, 4, 5)))

-- Hannes