linux-kernel - Re: [RFC/PATCH 1/2] perf script: Add --time-filter option

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: <8738tn48c5.fsf@sejong.aot.lge.com>
Date:	Thu, 16 May 2013 17:50:18 +0900
From:	Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
To:	David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
Cc:	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...stprotocols.net>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Namhyung Kim <namhyung.kim@....com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
	Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
	Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH 1/2] perf script: Add --time-filter option

Hi David,

On Wed, 15 May 2013 20:42:30 -0600, David Ahern wrote:
> On 5/15/13 7:56 PM, Namhyung Kim wrote:
>>> How about just --time? less typing.
>>
>> Thanks, I'm fine with '--time' too but '--time-filter' looks more
>
> yes, I just have really long command lines now. Is there a consistent
> single letter (X?)?

Do you mean a single-letter option "-X" for this?

>
>> obvious.  What does the timehist command do, btw? ;)
>
> task scheduling time history including run time and time between
> sched-in. It needs to be updated to use tracepoints and perhaps fold
> into perf-sched (e.g., perf sched history). Too many features; too
> little time. I hope to get to it in the next month or so.

Looks useful.

>
>>> I would expect parse_nsec_time to fail. e.g., a time string like 123455.a
>>
>> It looks like current strtol() returns 0 when failed to parse like
>> above.  Hmm.. do I have to check whether the return value is 0 or just
>> ignore invalid inputs?
>
> end will point to the next character not converted so make sure it is
> as expected (*end == '\0').

Arh, okay.  So I'll change it to check the 'end' and fails if an
unexpected input comes.

Thanks,
Namhyung
--
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/