Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755212AbaKTGcF (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Nov 2014 01:32:05 -0500 Received: from LGEMRELSE7Q.lge.com ([156.147.1.151]:59803 "EHLO lgemrelse7q.lge.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750777AbaKTGcC (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Nov 2014 01:32:02 -0500 X-Original-SENDERIP: 10.177.222.235 X-Original-MAILFROM: namhyung@gmail.com From: Namhyung Kim To: "Liang\, Kan" Cc: "acme\@kernel.org" , "jolsa\@redhat.com" , "a.p.zijlstra\@chello.nl" , "eranian\@google.com" , "linux-kernel\@vger.kernel.org" , "mingo\@redhat.com" , "paulus\@samba.org" , "ak\@linux.intel.com" Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 1/3] perf tools: enable LBR call stack support References: <1416346617-3577-1-git-send-email-kan.liang@intel.com> <1416346617-3577-2-git-send-email-kan.liang@intel.com> <87r3wzpt4o.fsf@sejong.aot.lge.com> <37D7C6CF3E00A74B8858931C1DB2F07701671D25@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com> Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2014 15:32:00 +0900 In-Reply-To: <37D7C6CF3E00A74B8858931C1DB2F07701671D25@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com> (Kan Liang's message of "Wed, 19 Nov 2014 14:32:08 +0000") Message-ID: <871toypelb.fsf@sejong.aot.lge.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 19 Nov 2014 14:32:08 +0000, Kan Liang wrote: >> On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 16:36:55 -0500, kan liang wrote: >> > + if (attr->exclude_user) { >> > + attr->exclude_user = 0; >> > + >> > + pr_warning("LBR callstack option is only available" >> > + " to get user callchain information." >> > + " Force exclude_user to 0.\n"); >> > + } >> >> I'm not sure what's in a higher priority - maybe I missed earlier discussion. >> IOW what about this? >> >> if (attr->exclude_user) { >> pr_warning("LBR callstack option is only available" >> " to get user callchain information.\n"); > > I think either is fine. I'd like to add more info "Falling back to framepointers." > based on your changes. > So the user know what they will get then. > > What do you think? Looks good to me. But I still slightly prefer not to override user settings. But it's not a strong opinion though - I'd like to here from others. Thanks, Namhyung > > pr_warning("LBR callstack option is only available" > " to get user callchain information." > " Falling back to framepointers.\n"); > > pr_ warning ("Cannot use LBR callstack with branch stack" > " Falling back to framepointers.\n"); -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/