[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120503204212.GC8807@infradead.org>
Date: Thu, 3 May 2012 17:42:12 -0300
From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...stprotocols.net>
To: David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
Cc: Namhyung Kim <namhyung.kim@....com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...il.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/13] perf target: Introduce perf_target_errno
Em Thu, May 03, 2012 at 02:34:20PM -0600, David Ahern escreveu:
> On 5/2/12 12:59 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> >Also it would be better to have it as PERF_ERRNO__PID_OVERRIDE_CPU, etc.
>
> I thought you wanted subsystem based errno's (PERF_TARGET__XXXXX)
> versus one big set (PERF_ERRNO__XXXXX). Did you change your mind?
Oops, I didn't realize PID being the subsys, then yeah, that is ok.
But that would make it PERF_ERR__TARGET_, as PERF_TARGET__ doesn't
straight away brings back "error enumeration", at least for me :)
But this is getting overly long, ideas?
PERF_ we need, its libperf's "namespace", then ERRNO looks needed too,
heck, make it long:
PERF_ERRNO_TARGET__PID_OVERRIDE_CPU
After all most of the time this will just be inside the function setting
the error and the strerrno function that will convert this to an string,
right?
- 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