On Mon, Mar 18, 2024 at 08:02:24AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> > 1. Don't back-patch wait events to v17+. Use the closest existing event.
> > 2. Let wait_event_names.txt back-patches control the enum order. For example,
> > a line could have an annotation that controls its position relative to the
> > auto-sorted lines. For another example, the generator could stop sorting.
> > 3. Accept the renumbering, because the consequence isn't that horrible.
> I see an option (4), similar to your (2) without the per-line
> annotation: add a new magic keyword like the existing "Section" that
> is used in the first lines of generate-wait_event_types.pl where we
> generate tab-separated lines with the section name as prefix of each
> line. So I can think of something like:
> Section: ClassName - WaitEventFoo
> FOO_1 "Waiting in foo1"
> FOO_2 "Waiting in foo2"
> Backpatch:
> BAR_1 "Waiting in bar1"
> BAR_2 "Waiting in bar2"
>
> Then force the ordering for the docs and keep the elements in the
> backpatch section at the end of the enums in the order in the txt.
> One thing that could make sense is to enforce that "Backpatch" is at
> the end of a section, meaning that we would need a second keyword like
> a "Section: EndBackpatch" or something like that. That's not strictly
> necessary IMO as the format of the txt is easy to follow.
Works for me, with or without the trailing keyword line.
