[lkml]   [2011]   [Mar]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [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
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2011-03-06 11:19    [W:0.131 / U:5.236 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site