[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150203114550.6646db20@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2015 11:45:50 -0500
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6 v2] perf: Make perf aware of tracefs
On Tue, 3 Feb 2015 15:16:25 +0100
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 02, 2015 at 02:35:07PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>
> SNIP
>
> > }
> > @@ -325,12 +351,19 @@ const char *perf_debugfs_mount(const char *mountpoint)
> > void perf_debugfs_set_path(const char *mntpt)
> > {
> > snprintf(debugfs_mountpoint, strlen(debugfs_mountpoint), "%s", mntpt);
> > - set_tracing_events_path(mntpt);
> > + set_tracing_events_path("tracing/", mntpt);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static const char *find_tracefs(void)
> > +{
> > + const char *path = __perf_tracefs_mount(NULL);
> > +
> > + return path;
>
> I guess you ommited the fprint(stderr... ) warning on purpose
> (like in find_debugfs), because the tracefs is not upstream yet, right?
Right, because I didn't want people complaining about using a new perf
with an old kernel, and suddenly get warnings.
>
> maybe we want at least pr_debug warning here..
> anyway, other than that the patchset looks ok to me:
I was thinking that we could add one later, when tracefs is more common.
>
> Acked-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>
Thanks!
Arnaldo, do you want to pick this up?
-- Steve
--
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