From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756254Ab1DLSvM (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Apr 2011 14:51:12 -0400 Received: from mail.skyhub.de ([78.46.96.112]:46170 "EHLO mail.skyhub.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754305Ab1DLSvL (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Apr 2011 14:51:11 -0400 Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 20:51:04 +0200 From: Borislav Petkov To: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo Cc: Frederic Weisbecker , David Ahern , Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra , Steven Rostedt , LKML Subject: Re: adding trace-cmd's plugins to perf Message-ID: <20110412185104.GA9891@liondog.tnic> Mail-Followup-To: Borislav Petkov , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Frederic Weisbecker , David Ahern , Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra , Steven Rostedt , LKML References: <4DA12905.2020806@gmail.com> <20110412162245.GB2240@nowhere> <20110412183536.GA20452@ghostprotocols.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110412183536.GA20452@ghostprotocols.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 03:35:36PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > Em Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 06:22:47PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker escreveu: > > On Sat, Apr 09, 2011 at 09:50:29PM -0600, David Ahern wrote: > > > Right now perf script cannot process kvm tracepoints: > > > > > > perf record -e kvm:* -p 6446 -- sleep 5 > > > > > > perf script > > > Warning: Error: expected type 4 but read 7 > > > > are about merging common code between the two commands. Also, trace-cmd and perf > > > are in separate repositories so a shared lib is going to inconvenience > > > one of the two. > > > > So, we copied the tools/perf/util/trace-event-* files from trace-cmd to perf > > a while go. Then both files took their own path, both pulling fixes/enhancement > > from each others (probably more in the trace-cmd -> perf direction). > > > > And perf is indeed a bit backward wrt parsing, because it lacks those plugins > > for example. So now it would be nice to unify that in a common lib so that it > > works well in both. > > > > Steve proposed a shared tools/trace.so, that perf and trace-cmd could plug > > into, I really would like to see that happening too. > > > > I think Ingo had some reserves about this, due to potential versioning > > and compatibility that such a dynamic lib would involve. > > So we don't commit to an ABI for a while, just linking with it, changing > users when changing the ABI. > > I encourage David to go and add the bits of trace-cmd he needs for > support the plugins he wants used in perf on tools/lib/ and make perf > use it. > > That way we again reduce the differences between the codebases, or at least > reduce the feature gap. Also, just FYI, I have this RAS daemon patchset which splits perf functionality into different sub-libs, which are more or less topic based: tools/lib/trace/ - all the trace-event* stuff from Steven tools/lib/lk/ - generic enough stuff (git headers, etc) which several tools could use tools/lib/perf/ - functionality related to perf events Here's the last submission http://marc.info/?l=linux-edac&m=129562244211501&w=2 and I'm currently finishing a new rebase against tip/perf/core. If you're fine with that split I'd suggest I load off my stuff first so that David can continue from there and I can finally stop rebasing like crazy each time perf moves forward. Opinions? Suggestions? Thanks. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris.