Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 20 Jan 2012 07:47:11 -0700 | From | David Ahern <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] [TRIVIAL] perf probe usability related fixes. |
| |
On 01/20/2012 05:13 AM, Srikar Dronamraju wrote: > From: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > Ingo pointed out few perf probe usability related errors during > his review of uprobes. > > Since these issues are independent of uprobes, fixing them in a > separate patch. > > Suggested-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> > Signed-off-by: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > --- > tools/perf/util/probe-event.c | 6 +++--- > 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/tools/perf/util/probe-event.c b/tools/perf/util/probe-event.c > index f6f5794..da38ec5 100644 > --- a/tools/perf/util/probe-event.c > +++ b/tools/perf/util/probe-event.c > @@ -1825,7 +1825,7 @@ static int __add_probe_trace_events(struct perf_probe_event *pev, > } > > ret = 0; > - printf("Add new event%s\n", (ntevs > 1) ? "s:" : ":"); > + printf("Added new event%s\n", (ntevs > 1) ? "s:" : ":");
It's not past tense until after write_probe_trace_event() right? Where the message is now you can get an error message after that printf.
David
| |