Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Wed, 7 Dec 2011 15:35:46 +0100 | | From | Robert Richter <> | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 08/10] perf tool: Unify handling of features when writing feature section |
| |
On 07.12.11 12:14:09, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > Em Tue, Dec 06, 2011 at 05:33:58PM +0100, Robert Richter escreveu: > > On 06.12.11 11:36:30, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > > > If you fix that please add this warning as well when no build-ids are > > > found, which hopefully is the odd case these days as all distros I'm > > > aware of have build-ids in all DSOs. > > > > What about the following change in addition? perf record then still > > stops with an error, but --no-buildid could be used to proceed anyway: > > > > diff --git a/tools/perf/builtin-record.c b/tools/perf/builtin-record.c > > index 766fa0a..80e08ca 100644 > > --- a/tools/perf/builtin-record.c > > +++ b/tools/perf/builtin-record.c > > @@ -493,6 +493,13 @@ static int __cmd_record(struct perf_record *rec, int argc, const char **argv) > > return err; > > } > > > > + if (!no_buildid > > + && !perf_header__has_feat(&session->header, HEADER_BUILD_ID)) { > > + pr_err("Couldn't collect buildids. " > "Your report results may be misleading if profiled " > "DSOs changed after the record session.\n" > > + "Use --no-buildid option if you know that " > "there where no changes in the profiled DSOs.\n"); > > + return -1; > > + } > > + > > rec->post_processing_offset = lseek(output, 0, SEEK_CUR); > > I can do these changes if you agree with this wording,
Yes, I am fine with it.
Thanks,
-Robert
-- Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. Operating System Research Center
|  |