Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759618Ab1CDOhV (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Mar 2011 09:37:21 -0500 Received: from hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com ([71.74.56.122]:48194 "EHLO hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758466Ab1CDOhU (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Mar 2011 09:37:20 -0500 X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.1 cv=dquaJDitHqzHCdqWSoZ6IgapSuTzW/4TaRYx9N9k4W8= c=1 sm=0 a=_RNfGJhW_G8A:10 a=Q9fys5e9bTEA:10 a=OPBmh+XkhLl+Enan7BmTLg==:17 a=JeQ7r8q9cwzjBT4CA48A:9 a=mM7byUpeoS-IoAoS_w1U_bSma44A:4 a=PUjeQqilurYA:10 a=OPBmh+XkhLl+Enan7BmTLg==:117 X-Cloudmark-Score: 0 X-Originating-IP: 67.242.120.143 Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf lock: clean the options for perf record From: Steven Rostedt To: Hitoshi Mitake Cc: Frederic Weisbecker , Peter Zijlstra , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, h.mitake@gmail.com, Paul Mackerras , Ingo Molnar , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo In-Reply-To: <4D70B3E1.8020108@dcl.info.waseda.ac.jp> References: <1298388507-19774-1-git-send-email-mitake@dcl.info.waseda.ac.jp> <4D63D685.2010401@dcl.info.waseda.ac.jp> <1298389415.2217.243.camel@twins> <20110222182206.GB1799@nowhere> <4D648A65.2040107@dcl.info.waseda.ac.jp> <4D667D60.5010903@dcl.info.waseda.ac.jp> <20110224165014.GB1840@nowhere> <4D67E286.8010907@dcl.info.waseda.ac.jp> <4D70B3E1.8020108@dcl.info.waseda.ac.jp> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-15" Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2011 09:37:18 -0500 Message-ID: <1299249438.20306.3.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.30.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1056 Lines: 27 On Fri, 2011-03-04 at 18:41 +0900, Hitoshi Mitake wrote: > BTW, how do you think about the idea of exporting data in > python (or other neutral) expression from procfs? I feel it is a > good idea. Communicating with unified format between user space and > kernel space will reduce lots of parsing overhead. Is this too > aggressive or insane? As I mentioned in another email, I have no problem with an easy to parse file. But I will aggressively NAK any "python" or other scripting language. I'm sure I would get the same response if I were to have the kernel outputting perl language ;) I would be OK if we have two files similar to stat and status, where one format is human readable, the other is for parsing. Thus, the only acceptable language that should come out of the kernel is English. -- Steve -- 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/