[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4D8CDE61.6050400@cisco.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2011 12:26:41 -0600
From: David Ahern <daahern@...co.com>
To: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...stprotocols.net>
CC: linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
mingo@...e.hu, peterz@...radead.org, fweisbec@...il.com,
paulus@...ba.org, tglx@...utronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf tools: Emit clearer message for sys_perf_event_open
ENOENT return
On 03/25/11 12:08, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> Em Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 12:05:50PM -0600, David Ahern escreveu:
>> Resend of patch sent back in January 2011 in light of recent confusion around
>> unsupported events for a given platform.
>>
>> Improve sys_perf_event_open ENOENT return handling in top and record, just
>> like 5a3446b does for stat.
>>
>> Retry of Arnaldo's patch using error instead of die which allows the fallback
>> from hardware cycles to software clock.
>
> Please use ui__warning(""...) as it will work in the TUI too.
error() is consistent with current pattern. Is ui__warning the
preference for new messages? Is that for perf-top only?
--
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