Re: [PATCH] Identify LWLocks in tracepoints

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Craig Ringer <craig(dot)ringer(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Identify LWLocks in tracepoints
Date: 2021-05-10 11:59:16
Message-ID: 4569b684-a0fa-f2c2-205a-70ab8824bd26@enterprisedb.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 05.05.21 06:20, Craig Ringer wrote:
> On Wed, 5 May 2021 at 09:15, Craig Ringer <craig(dot)ringer(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>
>>> warning: suggest braces around empty body in an ‘if’ statement [-Wempty-body]
>>> 1322 | TRACE_POSTGRESQL_LWLOCK_WAIT_START(T_NAME(lock), mode);
>>> | ^
>>
>> Odd that I didn't get that.
>
> This compiler complaint is not due to the _ENABLED() test as such.
> It's due to the fact that we completely define out the
> TRACE_POSTGRESQL_ macros with src/backend/utils/Gen_dummy_probes.sed .
>
> While explicit braces could be added around each test, I suggest
> fixing Gen_dummy_probes.sed to emit the usual dummy statement instead.
> Patch attached.

Committed, with the Gen_dummy_probes.pl change added.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Amit Langote 2021-05-10 12:20:52 Re: Inherited UPDATE/DELETE vs async execution
Previous Message Joe Conway 2021-05-10 11:50:14 Re: PG 14 release notes, first draft