Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [RFC 4/4] perf kvm: Fix output fields instead of 'trace' for perf kvm report on powerpc | From | Ravi Bangoria <> | Date | Tue, 8 Mar 2016 21:12:01 +0530 |
| |
Hi Arnaldo,
Gentle reminder :) Any updates?
Regards, Ravi
On Thursday 03 March 2016 06:49 AM, Ravi Bangoria wrote: > Thanks acme, > > On Wednesday 02 March 2016 09:52 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: >> Em Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 09:16:48PM +0530, Ravi Bangoria escreveu: >>> Thanks Arnaldo, >>> >>> Please find my comments. >>> >>> On Wednesday 02 March 2016 07:55 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: >>>> Em Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 02:37:45PM +0530, Ravi Bangoria escreveu: >>>>> use_browser = 0; >>>>> + if (!field_order && >>>>> + is_perf_data_reorded_on_ppc(session->evlist) && >>>>> + perf_guest_only()) >>>>> + field_order = "overhead,comm,dso,sym"; >>>>> + >>>> Can you please do it as: >>>> >>>> __weak void arch__override_field_order(struct perf_evlist *evlist, >>>> const char **field_order) >>>> { >>>> } >>> So you mean like this - Just implement only weak function and move >>> code into >>> it? >>> ie. No strong implementation at this point of time. >>> >>> Like, >>> >>> __weak void arch__override_field_order(struct perf_evlist *evlist, >>> const >>> char **f_order) >>> { >>> if (!field_order && >>> is_perf_data_reorded_on_ppc(session->evlist) && >> Oh, I see, ugh, when running on x86_64 we wouldn't use this, so we need >> to have per arch default field orders, now I have to recall why is it >> that we need this per-arch field order :-\ > > Sorry, I'm little bit confused. We need arch specific functionality > present > on all arch to make cross arch reporting possible. > > for example, record perf.data on ppc and report on x86, we need > ppc specific function present in perf binary compiled on x86. > > Please let me know if I understood it wrong. > > Regads, > Ravi >
| |