[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200513144610.GM3158213@krava>
Date: Wed, 13 May 2020 16:46:10 +0200
From: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
To: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <arnaldo.melo@...il.com>
Cc: Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Michael Petlan <mpetlan@...hat.com>,
Joe Mario <jmario@...hat.com>, Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
Kajol Jain <kjain@...ux.ibm.com>,
John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] perf expr: Report line number with error
On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 11:08:25AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> Em Wed, May 13, 2020 at 01:34:24PM +0200, Jiri Olsa escreveu:
> > On Wed, May 13, 2020 at 12:09:30AM -0700, Ian Rogers wrote:
> > > On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 1:54 PM Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Display line number on when parsing custom metrics file, like:
> > > >
> > > > $ cat metrics
> > > > // IPC
> > > > mine1 = inst_retired.any / cpu_clk_unhalted.thread;
> > > >
> > > > krava
> > > > $ sudo perf stat --metrics-file ./metrics -M mine1 -a -I 1000 --metric-only
> > > > failed to parse metrics file: ./metrics:4
> > > >
> > > > Please note that because the grammar is flexible on new lines,
> > > > the syntax could be broken on the next 'not fitting' item and
> > > > not the first wrong word, like:
> > > >
> > > > $ cat metrics
> > > > // IPC
> > > > krava
> > > > mine1 = inst_retired.any / cpu_clk_unhalted.thread;
> > > > $ sudo perf stat --metrics-file ./metrics -M mine1 -a -I 1000 --metric-only
> > > > failed to parse metrics file: ./metrics:3
> > >
> > > A line number is better than nothing :-) It'd be nice to be told about
> > > broken events and more information about what's broken in the line. A
> > > common failure is @ vs / encoding and also no-use or misuse of \\.
> > > Perhaps expand the test coverage.
> >
> > yep, error reporting needs more changes.. but the line is crucial ;-)
>
> So I had started processing this patchkit, I assume you will send a v2
> and I should drop what I had processed, is that ok?
yes, I will resubmit on top of the other expr changes
we have now pending
jirka
Powered by blists - more mailing lists