Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 6 Aug 2011 02:43:44 +0200 | From | Frederic Weisbecker <> | Subject | Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/8] Having perf use libparsevent.a |
| |
On Fri, Aug 05, 2011 at 11:24:09PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote: > > > By keeping the code separate from perf, made the transition from > > trace-cmd to tools much easier. I've wasted too many days trying to > > get other ways working, and I don't want to rewrite perf to do so. > > But we want to move tools together, not further apart. Every code > activity i see from you is trying to tear apart instrumentation > tooling - while previously you agreed that it should be unified. So > why not do tools/perf/lib/ as you agreed before? > > I'm really not interested in seeing the libdrm/libdri mess repeated. > Libraries have their uses when there's some very important external > interface, but here it's actively harmful as it complicates and > hardcodes APIs into ABIs that are clearly not finished yet. > > Really, lets not be stupid here. > > Thanks, > > Ingo
The trace events format is a general interface that not only perf and trace-cmd use but also powertop and pytimechart, and may be others?
And given the breakage we had with powertop, for example, that broke because it was relying on an ad-hoc static layout of the trace event, or pytimechart that relies(ed?) on the event string output, I think that library is needed outside perf.
| |