[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110221215533.GD3583@nowhere>
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2011 22:55:35 +0100
From: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
To: David Ahern <daahern@...co.com>
Cc: linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
acme@...stprotocols.net, mingo@...e.hu, peterz@...radead.org,
paulus@...ba.org, tglx@...utronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] perf events: Add realtime clock event and timehist
option -v2
On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 02:41:53PM -0700, David Ahern wrote:
>
>
> On 02/21/11 14:37, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>
> > The goal is actually to extend perf script to handle more than just raw data.
> > So that it can handle the rest of what we can find in an event: time, ip, stacktraces...
> >
> > You've added 200 lines in perf report to add the dump support. It wouldn't
> > require more to extend perf script to do that. And the result is going to be
> > much more powerful.
> >
> > Look at struct scripting_ops::process_event().
>
> I actually have a draft of perf-script - essentially duplicating sample
> processing done in perf-report. When it got to the point of having to
> add a lot of code -- other features essentially -- just to get it to the
> point of being ready for this feature I stopped.
I don't understand why it's harder to extend print_event() rather than
perf report.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists