linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv2 1/2] perf tools: Collect tracing event data files directly

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 28 Sep 2011 10:03:08 -0400
From:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Cc:	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>, acme@...hat.com,
	eric.dumazet@...il.com, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl, mingo@...e.hu,
	paulus@...ba.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	nhorman@...driver.com
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 1/2] perf tools: Collect tracing event data files
 directly

On Wed, 2011-09-28 at 15:55 +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 04:56:06PM +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 09:36:31AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2011-09-26 at 11:11 +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> > > > Changing the way the event files are searched by quering specified
> > > > event files directly, instead of walking the events directory.
> > > > 
> > > > Hopefully this way is more straightforward and faster.
> > > 
> > > Have you looked at my code I posted earlier that uses the libparsevents?
> > > 
> > > It uses globs such that you could do -e sched:sched* and it will enable
> > > all sched events.
> > 
> > ops, haven't seen those changes yet..
> > I think I can go only with 2/2 patch, if the 1/2 collides with your changes
> 
> But it seems Steve's patches are not completely uncontroversial because
> of some crazy disagreements on where the libparsevent.so should lay (tools generic
> or tied to perf).

Which to me seems to be a silly road block, in which I never got a clear
answer for.

> 
> So until we get that situation solved, we should continue to move forward.

Sure, but it just forks the code even more, and it's almost to the point
where maintaining a fork will just be easier, not to mention quicker to
get out to the distros.

-- Steve



--
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/