From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754480Ab1I1Nzd (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Sep 2011 09:55:33 -0400 Received: from mail-ww0-f44.google.com ([74.125.82.44]:50753 "EHLO mail-ww0-f44.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752717Ab1I1Nzc (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Sep 2011 09:55:32 -0400 Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 15:55:27 +0200 From: Frederic Weisbecker To: Jiri Olsa Cc: Steven Rostedt , acme@redhat.com, eric.dumazet@gmail.com, a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl, mingo@elte.hu, paulus@samba.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, nhorman@tuxdriver.com Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 1/2] perf tools: Collect tracing event data files directly Message-ID: <20110928135525.GS18553@somewhere> References: <20110925133406.GB2702@jolsa.brq.redhat.com> <1317028312-5156-1-git-send-email-jolsa@redhat.com> <1317028312-5156-2-git-send-email-jolsa@redhat.com> <1317044192.26514.1.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> <20110926145606.GA8886@jolsa.brq.redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110926145606.GA8886@jolsa.brq.redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 04:56:06PM +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote: > On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 09:36:31AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > On Mon, 2011-09-26 at 11:11 +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote: > > > Changing the way the event files are searched by quering specified > > > event files directly, instead of walking the events directory. > > > > > > Hopefully this way is more straightforward and faster. > > > > Have you looked at my code I posted earlier that uses the libparsevents? > > > > It uses globs such that you could do -e sched:sched* and it will enable > > all sched events. > > ops, haven't seen those changes yet.. > I think I can go only with 2/2 patch, if the 1/2 collides with your changes But it seems Steve's patches are not completely uncontroversial because of some crazy disagreements on where the libparsevent.so should lay (tools generic or tied to perf). So until we get that situation solved, we should continue to move forward.