Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 06 Mar 2011 02:14:21 +0900 | From | Hitoshi Mitake <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] perf lock: clean the options for perf record |
| |
On 2011年03月04日 23:37, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Fri, 2011-03-04 at 18:41 +0900, Hitoshi Mitake wrote: > >> BTW, how do you think about the idea of exporting data in >> python (or other neutral) expression from procfs? I feel it is a >> good idea. Communicating with unified format between user space and >> kernel space will reduce lots of parsing overhead. Is this too >> aggressive or insane? > > As I mentioned in another email, I have no problem with an easy to parse > file. But I will aggressively NAK any "python" or other scripting > language. I'm sure I would get the same response if I were to have the > kernel outputting perl language ;) > > I would be OK if we have two files similar to stat and status, where one > format is human readable, the other is for parsing. > > Thus, the only acceptable language that should come out of the kernel is > English. > > -- Steve > > >
OK. As you say, the big confusion might be occur if there are lots of format like python or perl (and they have several versions).
The reason why I posted the patch is that I like the idea of /proc/config.gz. Providing the data from kernel in specific syntax is so smart, so I followed it :) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |