Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 15 Feb 2012 14:32:18 +0100 | From | Jiri Olsa <> | Subject | Re: [PATCHv4 0/9] perf tool: parser generator for events parsing |
| |
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 12:18:32PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Wed, 2012-02-15 at 10:24 +0100, Jiri Olsa wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 10:03:11PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > > These would be: period, config, config1, config2 and stephane's new > > > branch_sample_type, although that might want to get a shorter name. > > > > right, for pmu/.../ syntax there are allowed only fields from 'format' > > directory are so far.. with exceptions like: cycles/period=100000/ > > > > so I'll hardcode following config fields: > > config > > config1 > > config2 > > period > > branch_sample_type (branch, branch_type, branch_st ???) > > Uhmm,.. Stephane any particular preference on this? > > > to be used in xxx/.../ syntax > > > > also we need to choose some strategy of format field name shadowing > > with hardcoded fields: > > > > - BUILD_BUG in kernel PMU_FORMAT_ATTR > > - not allowed.. report error in perf runtime > > - allowed - hardcoded field have precedence > > - allowed - format field values have precedence > > > > I'd say either allow shadowing(with whatever precedence we this is better), > > or have the BUILD_BUG line in kernel.. > > I agree, if we can get the BUILD_BUG thing working that might be the > best option, otherwise we can do the precedence thing. We could even add > a syntax to resolve the namespace conflict in the latter case (eg. use > '$' PE_NAME to mean the hardcoded in case of conflict). err.. I could not get the BUILD_BUG working... looks like string comparison is something you are not supposed to do in cpp.. ;)
currently, I have the hardcoded fields to have a precedence, and I'd workaround/fix it if there's need.. later I mean..
also, any idea when's the branch_sample_type going in?
thanks, jirka
| |