[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c984a7d9-1e59-93f6-36b5-6ce878039f53@linux.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2018 22:00:32 +0800
From: "Jin, Yao" <yao.jin@...ux.intel.com>
To: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
Cc: acme@...nel.org, jolsa@...nel.org, peterz@...radead.org,
mingo@...hat.com, alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com,
Linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ak@...ux.intel.com,
kan.liang@...el.com, yao.jin@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] perf: Support perf -vv
On 3/28/2018 9:22 PM, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 10:57:08PM +0800, Jin Yao wrote:
>> We keep having bug reports that when users build perf on their own,
>> but they don't install some needed libraries such as libelf,
>> libbfd/libibery.
>>
>> The perf can build, but it is missing important functionality.
>>
>> This patch provides a new option '-vv' which will print the
>> compiled-in status of libraries.
>>
>> The 'perf -vv' is equal to 'perf -version --build-options'.
>>
>> For example:
>>
>> $ ./perf -vv or ./perf -version --build-options
>> perf version 4.13.rc5.gcb1183
>> dwarf: [ on ]
>> dwarf_getlocations: [ on ]
>> glibc: [ on ]
>> gtk2: [ on ]
>> libaudit: [ OFF ]
>> libbfd: [ on ]
>> libelf: [ on ]
>> libnuma: [ on ]
>> numa_num_possible_cpus: [ on ]
>> libperl: [ on ]
>> libpython: [ on ]
>> libslang: [ on ]
>> libcrypto: [ on ]
>> libunwind: [ on ]
>> libdw-dwarf-unwind: [ on ]
>> zlib: [ on ]
>> lzma: [ on ]
>> get_cpuid: [ on ]
>> bpf: [ on ]
>> [ on ]: library is compiled-in
>> [ OFF ]: library is disabled in make configuration
>> OR library is not installed in build environment
>>
>> v2:
>> ---
>> Use a global variable version_verbose to count the number of 'v'.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jin Yao <yao.jin@...ux.intel.com>
>> ---
>> tools/perf/perf.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++----
>> tools/perf/perf.h | 1 +
>> 2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/tools/perf/perf.c b/tools/perf/perf.c
>> index 1b3fc8e..355219e 100644
>> --- a/tools/perf/perf.c
>> +++ b/tools/perf/perf.c
>> @@ -32,7 +32,7 @@
>> #include <linux/kernel.h>
>>
>> const char perf_usage_string[] =
>> - "perf [--version] [--help] [OPTIONS] COMMAND [ARGS]";
>> + "perf [--version [--build-options]] [--help] [OPTIONS] COMMAND [ARGS]";
>
> --build-options is 'perf version' option no?
>
> jirka
>
Yes. Command-line something like:
perf --version --build-options or perf -v --build-options.
Is this usage string not correct? If so, I'd like to fix that.
"perf [--version [--build-options]] [--help] [OPTIONS] COMMAND [ARGS]";
Thanks
Jin Yao
Powered by blists - more mailing lists