From: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
To: "Liang\, Kan" <kan.liang@intel.com>
Cc: "acme\@kernel.org" <acme@kernel.org>,
"jolsa\@redhat.com" <jolsa@redhat.com>,
"a.p.zijlstra\@chello.nl" <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
"eranian\@google.com" <eranian@google.com>,
"linux-kernel\@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"mingo\@redhat.com" <mingo@redhat.com>,
"paulus\@samba.org" <paulus@samba.org>,
"ak\@linux.intel.com" <ak@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 1/3] perf tools: enable LBR call stack support
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2014 15:32:00 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <871toypelb.fsf@sejong.aot.lge.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <37D7C6CF3E00A74B8858931C1DB2F07701671D25@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com> (Kan Liang's message of "Wed, 19 Nov 2014 14:32:08 +0000")
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");
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-11-20 6:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-11-18 21:36 [PATCH V4 0/3] perf tool: Haswell LBR call stack support (user) kan.liang
2014-11-18 21:36 ` [PATCH V4 1/3] perf tools: enable LBR call stack support kan.liang
2014-11-19 7:05 ` Namhyung Kim
2014-11-19 14:32 ` Liang, Kan
2014-11-20 6:32 ` Namhyung Kim [this message]
2014-11-20 12:37 ` Stephane Eranian
2014-11-20 13:39 ` Liang, Kan
2014-11-18 21:36 ` [PATCH V4 2/3] perf tool: Move cpumode resolve code to add_callchain_ip kan.liang
2014-11-18 21:36 ` [PATCH V4 3/3] perf tools: Construct LBR call chain kan.liang
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=871toypelb.fsf@sejong.aot.lge.com \
--to=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=eranian@google.com \
--cc=jolsa@redhat.com \
--cc=kan.liang@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome