linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 01/15] perf: Separate out trace-cmd parse-events from perf files

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]

Message-ID: <CAFTL4hy_n_9nXFeYv+okW6Z4LUMcaigN0iNaDMTtrFPznEatJw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 6 Apr 2012 17:23:05 +0200
From:	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
To:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Steven Rostedt <srostedt@...hat.com>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...radead.org>,
	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>, Arun Sharma <asharma@...com>,
	Namhyung Kim <namhyung.kim@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/15] perf: Separate out trace-cmd parse-events from perf files

2012/4/6 Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>:
> On Fri, Apr 06, 2012 at 12:47:52AM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>> From: Steven Rostedt <srostedt@...hat.com>
>>
>> Move the trace-event-parse.c code that originally came from trace-cmd into
>> their own files. The new file will be called trace-parse-events.c, as
>> the name of trace-cmd's file was parse-events.c too, but it conflicted
>> with the parse-events.c file in perf that parses the command line.
>>
>> This tries to update the code with mimimal changes.
>>
>> Perf specific code stays in the trace-event-parse.[ch] files and
>> the common parsing code is now in trace-parse-events.c and
>> trace-parse-events.h.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
>> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
>> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
>> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
>> Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...radead.org>
>> Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
>> Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
>> Cc: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
>> Cc: Arun Sharma <asharma@...com>
>> Cc: Namhyung Kim <namhyung.kim@....com>
>> Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
>> ---
>>  tools/perf/Makefile                  |    2 +
>>  tools/perf/util/trace-event-parse.c  | 3135 ----------------------------------
>>  tools/perf/util/trace-event.h        |  275 +---
>>  tools/perf/util/trace-parse-events.c | 3125 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>  tools/perf/util/trace-parse-events.h |  273 +++
>>  5 files changed, 3405 insertions(+), 3405 deletions(-)
>>  create mode 100644 tools/perf/util/trace-parse-events.c
>>  create mode 100644 tools/perf/util/trace-parse-events.h
>
> Err, maybe I'm missing something but why this additional step? I mean,
> you could do:
>
> patch 1: Add libtraceevent.a from trace-cmd
> patch 2: Fixup perf so that it is ready to be switched to the new lib (specific
>                wrappers, etc)
> patch 3: switch it to libtraceevent.a
>
> Only three patches, right?

Because this step splits what is purely perf code and what isn't. Then
later on we remove the non-perf part only.
I think it makes it smoother that way: we first identify what we want
to delete and layout the things in advance
by separating it. It makes the removal easier to review.
--
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/