[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120223181132.GB3571@infradead.org>
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2012 16:11:32 -0200
From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>
To: Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Roberto Agostino Vitillo <ravitillo@....gov>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, peterz@...radead.org,
robert.richter@....com, ming.m.lin@...el.com, andi@...stfloor.org,
asharma@...com, vweaver1@...s.utk.edu, khandual@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
dsahern@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 13/18] perf: add support for taken branch sampling
to perf report
Em Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 05:53:53PM +0100, Stephane Eranian escreveu:
> Ok, so I looked at that today. Adding the feature bit is trivial.
> But what's not easy is to get to the feature bit in perf report
> by the time we need it. Very quickly after parsing the options,
> we setup a bunch of things such as browser mode, sorting
> order based on the -b option. But to get to the feature bit, we
> would need to wait until after the session is created in
> __cmd_report() which is way later.
>
> So we either hoist perf_session__new() very early, i.e., as soon
> as we have the filename or we write yet another parse_header()
> function just to get to the feature bits. I would rather choose the
> first option. But none is really pretty...
>
> Arnaldo, any better idea?
Humm, lemme see...
By the time we need it is when we do setup_sorting, right? Perhaps we
can delay that till after we do perf_session__new and thus have read the
headers...
/me looks at the code.
- Arnaldo
--
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