Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 19 Jan 2018 12:55:35 -0300 | From | Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 01/10] perf tools: Integrating the CoreSight decoding library |
| |
Em Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 08:24:56AM -0700, Mathieu Poirier escreveu: > On 19 January 2018 at 08:12, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 11:58:19AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > >> Em Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 03:27:43PM +0100, Jiri Olsa escreveu: > >> > On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 11:14:23AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > >> > > Em Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 02:59:48PM +0100, Jiri Olsa escreveu: > >> > > > On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 10:41:39AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > >> > > > > Shouldn't libopencsd be treated like libbabeltrace was before > >> > > > > the required version was widely available in distros? > >> > > > >> > > > > I.e. these csets should have the rationale for that: > >> > > > >> > > > > Enabling it once it became widely available: > >> > > > >> > > > > 24787afbcd01 ("perf tools: Enable LIBBABELTRACE by default") > >> > > > >> > > > > Disabling it because we would need to get things from tarballs/git > >> > > > > repos, build it in our machines, as requested by Ingo: > >> > > > >> > > > > 6ab2b762befd ("perf build: Disable libbabeltrace check by default") > >> > > > > >> > > > I think at that time we did not have a way to hide the check, > >> > > > now we have FEATURE_DISPLAY seprated so we can still check > >> > > > for it, but users won't be bothered with [ FAIL ] output > >> > > > >> > > Ok, users won't be bothered with the fail output, but we tried hard to > >> > > get the build fast by having it only test for things that are widely > >> > > available, right? I.e. if we know something is not widely available then > >> > > we better not try to build with it and get faster builds, wasn't that > >> > > part of the rationale in the babeltrace case? > >> > > > >> > > If one has to build from sources some library, then its not a problem to > >> > > have in the make command line a LIBOPENCSD=1 switch? > >> > > >> > right, we can do it like that > >> > >> So I'm applying v2 and we can go on from there, to make progress, ok? > >> I'm adding your Acked-by to all but the build ones, ok? > > > > I think v3 was in better shape.. wrt tabs and overall display > > > > jirka > > Jiri is correct - V3 should be considered.
So, please take a look at my perf/core branch, hopefully my mistake was just on the message saying I would apply v2, check that v3 was what I applied.
- Arnaldo
| |