[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20151216075552.GA20341@krava.local>
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2015 08:55:52 +0100
From: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
To: "Wangnan (F)" <wangnan0@...wei.com>
Cc: acme@...nel.org, masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com, jolsa@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, pi3orama@....com, lizefan@...wei.com,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 10/14] perf tools: Enable indices setting syntax for
BPF maps
On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 10:02:28AM +0800, Wangnan (F) wrote:
>
>
> On 2015/12/15 21:42, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> >On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 10:39:19AM +0000, Wang Nan wrote:
> >>This patch introduce a new syntax to perf event parser:
> >>
> >> # perf record -e './test_bpf_map_3.c/maps:channel.value[0,1,2,3...5]=101/' usleep 2
> >why 3 dots? I'd think the standard is 2 ?
>
> The standard (actually it is a gcc extension, not C standard) is 3 dots.
> Please have a look at [1] and [2]. Although I also think '..' is better.
>
> So after you seeing this, do you still think we should follow our
> intuition instead of following GCC? If you still prefer '..' I'll
> change it.
I'm ok with '...'
I think I only thought about '..' as a standard because of the way I use git log ;-)
thanks,
jirka
>
> Thank you.
>
> [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/11/23/4
> [2] https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Case-Ranges.html
>
> Thank you.
>
> >just curious
> > [0,1,2,3..5]
> >3 made me think there's something speecial about it ;-)
> >
> >
> >jirka
>
>
--
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