Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 12 Jun 2014 15:19:50 +0200 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] tools:perf: move tools/perf/util to tools/lib/perf_util | From | Jean Pihet <> |
| |
On 12 June 2014 14:49, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 09:34:32AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: >> Em Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 10:26:42AM +0200, Jean Pihet escreveu: >> > This is a first move of the perf code into a set of libraries, which >> > allow the implementation of other external tools. >> > >> > The first users of the perf libraries would be: >> > - perf itself, >> > - the RAS daemon. >> > >> > The commit includes: >> > - the move of the code from util to lib/perf_util, >> > - creation of Makefile in perf_util, >> > - update of Makefile.perf to build a library for perf_util, >> > - fix of the include paths, eg. "../perf.h" to <perf.h>, "util/hist.h" to >> > <hist.h> >> >> Can't you just go moving what you actually use? Or do you really plan to >> use all that? > > You asked me that same question when I was doing that. :-) The idea is to move the re-usable code in libraries, so that other tools than perf can use it as well.
> > And I told Jean repeatedly that this needs to be splitted slowly, in > smaller libraries like we've been discussing it numerous times. Hrrr. I see it as a first move, later the rest of the code can be moved the same way. Now it seems that moving all from util/ at once is too much. How do you see it happening?
Note: moving some code in the perf source is hairy enough (cf. the simplicity of the Makefiles ;-) and so I do not want to re-do it all over again too many times.
Thx for looking! Jean
> > :-\ > > -- > Regards/Gruss, > Boris. > > Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine. > --
| |