Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760146Ab0FQO0N (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Jun 2010 10:26:13 -0400 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([18.85.46.34]:46014 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752999Ab0FQO0M (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Jun 2010 10:26:12 -0400 Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 11:25:46 -0300 From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo To: Borislav Petkov Cc: Borislav Petkov , Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar , Frederic Weisbecker , Steven Rostedt , Lin Ming , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] perf: Add persistent events Message-ID: <20100617142546.GA563@ghostprotocols.net> References: <1275059860.27810.9635.camel@twins> <20100528155719.GA10141@kryptos.osrc.amd.com> <1275070030.1645.362.camel@laptop> <20100603134301.GA30880@kryptos.osrc.amd.com> <20100603173242.GD29202@ghostprotocols.net> <20100614192514.GA7803@kryptos.osrc.amd.com> <20100614210116.GA26716@ghostprotocols.net> <20100614212426.GA19915@liondog.tnic> <20100615010201.GA27077@ghostprotocols.net> <20100617134357.GA6115@kryptos.osrc.amd.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100617134357.GA6115@kryptos.osrc.amd.com> X-Url: http://acmel.wordpress.com User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-08-17) X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by bombadil.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2117 Lines: 44 Em Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 03:43:57PM +0200, Borislav Petkov escreveu: > From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo > Date: Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 10:02:01PM -0300 > > > however, this does not differentiate perflib (let's call it that for how > > > :) from libc headers. Do we want a "perf" or "kernel" or "perflib" or > > > whatever prefix here - it might make sense later when this thing grows > > > to differentiate between the namespaces...? > > Agreed, but the last name this thing will have will be 'perf'something :-) > > One of the goals at least I have with pursuing this path is to separate > > out everything that is not strictly 'perf' into things that can be reused > > by other tools, like yours. > I'm still splitting perf/util into a more or less generic lib. Now, I > want to reuse as much code as possible and am parsing the > "mce:mce_record" tracepoint using parse_events(). However, this means > that I have to push the not-so-generic perf bits like > util/parse-events.c into the lib. Which, in turn, pulls in > util/trace-event* etc. I'm not that familiar with the trace bits in perf, but I'd say pick what is needed for your tool and stash it into files in a tools/lib/trace/ directory, in a way that can be used by both perf and your tools. I.e. no need to move files as-is, you can reorganize things to make it useful for both perf and your tool. > What is your preference, do we want to export all perf/util stuff for > other tools to use or rather link other tools together with > compilation modules from perf/util in case those other tools need > them? If we do it on a as-needed basis, as I suggested, we go eroding the current perf hodgepodge of potentially generic stuff. > I'm leaning towards the first one and am thinking "maximize code reuse" > but I'm not completely sure, there might be reasons against it... - Arnaldo -- 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/