linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 10/10] perf, tools, stat: Output JSON MetricExpr metric

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: <20170209183755.GA17928@krava>
Date:   Thu, 9 Feb 2017 19:37:55 +0100
From:   Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
To:     Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, acme@...nel.org,
        jolsa@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/10] perf, tools, stat: Output JSON MetricExpr metric

On Thu, Feb 09, 2017 at 09:00:35AM -0800, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 09, 2017 at 12:39:37PM +0100, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> > and this makes me think, that this is not the right approach
> > 
> > adding extra copy of an event when you want to add new expression?
> 
> I don't want to add new expressions.
> 
> I don't even need arbitrary expressions, just DividedBy
> to get percentages, you just forced me to do the expressions.
> 
> 
> > why can't we have another list/file of those expressions
> 
> The last time I proposed separate files Ingo vetoed it.
> He wanted everything built in.

sure, he veto it for event files.. expressions could be built
in same way as we have events now

> > from which point we could point and configure events we need
> 
> If you want full flexibility you can use your perf stat report
> approach, or what most people do is to just run a script/spreadsheet
> over the the -x; output. This all continues to work.
> 
> This is just a minimum approach to provide some convenience
> integrated with the event list to provide something similar
> as the built in expressions in stat-shadow. 
> 
> It's not trying to build the great perf scripting language.

yea I understand that but can't ack that based on the points
I descibed in my other email

jirka