[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1347657962.7172.82.camel@twins>
Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2012 23:26:02 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...stprotocols.net>,
David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Robert Richter <robert.richter@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3 v2] perf tool: give user better message if precise
is not supported
On Fri, 2012-09-14 at 22:11 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> return -EPERF_CPU_PRECISE_EV_NOTSUPP;
I just don't like having to enumerate all possible fails, I'm too lazy.
Can't we be smarter about that? Could we do a {reason}x{bit-offset} like
thing?
Where we limit reason to a few simple things like:
invalid
out-of-range
not-supported
and have the bit-offset indicate the field we're having the particular
problem with?
Then all we need is a smart way to generate and map the bit-offsets
without too much manual labour.
--
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