[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20171130113657.65a50277f9bafdaaae488cf9@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2017 11:36:57 +0900
From: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
To: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Cc: acme@...nel.org, jolsa@...nel.org, adrian.hunter@...el.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/12] perf, tools, probe: Support a quiet argument for
debug info open
On Tue, 28 Nov 2017 19:39:43 -0800
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 12:14:00PM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> > On Mon, 27 Nov 2017 16:23:15 -0800
> > Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org> wrote:
> >
> > > From: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
> > >
> > > Add a extra quiet argument to the debug info open / probe finder
> > > code that allows perf script to make them quieter. Otherwise
> > > we may end up with too many error messages when lots of
> > > instructions fail debug info parsing.
> >
> > IMHO, this kind of simple suppress warning message would better
> > be done with pr_* implementation (or its macro) since there
> > maybe new message added or other function which has warning
> > messages can be called in the future.
>
> Do you really mean adding a special pr_ / global just for this case?
I thought that we could control it by changing "verbose" global variables.
Something like inc_verbose() & dec_verbose() macros will help us to
suppress warning/debug messages temporary.
Thank you,
>
> Seems less clean to me, but I can do it.
>
> -Andi
--
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists