[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4D6D004F.5010602@cisco.com>
Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2011 07:18:55 -0700
From: David Ahern <daahern@...co.com>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.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 4/6] perf script: dump software events too
On 03/01/2011 07:09 AM, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>
> That's not on the right place. This is going to print the events even
> when we launch scripts. We only want to print them when we launch
> perf script without a script, which falls back to printing events
> (look at default_scripting_ops).
>
> Like I suggested you, it's better to extend struct
> scripting_ops::process_event()
> to take the whole event and let the handler decide what to do.
> Python and Perl scripting engines can just extract the raw sample and
> do like they did before.
> But print_event(), which is the process_event() handler for the
> default_scripting_ops,
> can handle the new printing features.
>
> That's also more flexible, this lets Python and Perl scripting engines
> be extendable
> to handle the rest of the event later.
I don't follow what you mean.
This is the same place that tracepoints are dumped. In the
PERF_TYPE_TRACEPOINT case process_event == print_event which dumps the
lines to stdout.
I came in added a switch that invokes a different handler for software
events. Software events will be processed differently than tracepoint.
The print_event function and its pretty_print function are not designed
to dump software events (and eventually hardware events).
David
--
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