[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <171701062468.353211.6199983200651676453.b4-ty@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 29 May 2024 12:26:02 -0700
From: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
To: Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Breno Leitao <leitao@...ian.org>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
irogers@...gle.com,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
Cc: "open list:PERFORMANCE EVENTS SUBSYSTEM" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
leit@...a.com,
"open list:PERFORMANCE EVENTS SUBSYSTEM" <linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] perf list: Fix the --no-desc option
On Fri, 17 May 2024 07:14:26 -0700, Breno Leitao wrote:
> Currently, the --no-desc option in perf list isn't functioning as
> intended.
>
> This issue arises from the overwriting of struct option->desc with the
> opposite value of struct option->long_desc. Consequently, whatever
> parse_options() returns at struct option->desc gets overridden later,
> rendering the --desc or --no-desc arguments ineffective.
>
> [...]
Applied to perf-tools-next, thanks!
Best regards,
--
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists