Messages in this thread | | | From | Mathieu Poirier <> | Date | Fri, 19 Jan 2018 10:28:24 -0700 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 01/10] perf tools: Integrating the CoreSight decoding library |
| |
On 19 January 2018 at 08:55, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org> wrote: > Em Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 08:24:56AM -0700, Mathieu Poirier escreveu: >> On 19 January 2018 at 08:12, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com> wrote: >> > On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 11:58:19AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: >> >> Em Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 03:27:43PM +0100, Jiri Olsa escreveu: >> >> > On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 11:14:23AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: >> >> > > Em Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 02:59:48PM +0100, Jiri Olsa escreveu: >> >> > > > On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 10:41:39AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: >> >> > > > > Shouldn't libopencsd be treated like libbabeltrace was before >> >> > > > > the required version was widely available in distros? >> >> > > >> >> > > > > I.e. these csets should have the rationale for that: >> >> > > >> >> > > > > Enabling it once it became widely available: >> >> > > >> >> > > > > 24787afbcd01 ("perf tools: Enable LIBBABELTRACE by default") >> >> > > >> >> > > > > Disabling it because we would need to get things from tarballs/git >> >> > > > > repos, build it in our machines, as requested by Ingo: >> >> > > >> >> > > > > 6ab2b762befd ("perf build: Disable libbabeltrace check by default") >> >> > > > >> >> > > > I think at that time we did not have a way to hide the check, >> >> > > > now we have FEATURE_DISPLAY seprated so we can still check >> >> > > > for it, but users won't be bothered with [ FAIL ] output >> >> > > >> >> > > Ok, users won't be bothered with the fail output, but we tried hard to >> >> > > get the build fast by having it only test for things that are widely >> >> > > available, right? I.e. if we know something is not widely available then >> >> > > we better not try to build with it and get faster builds, wasn't that >> >> > > part of the rationale in the babeltrace case? >> >> > > >> >> > > If one has to build from sources some library, then its not a problem to >> >> > > have in the make command line a LIBOPENCSD=1 switch? >> >> > >> >> > right, we can do it like that >> >> >> >> So I'm applying v2 and we can go on from there, to make progress, ok? >> >> I'm adding your Acked-by to all but the build ones, ok? >> > >> > I think v3 was in better shape.. wrt tabs and overall display >> > >> > jirka >> >> Jiri is correct - V3 should be considered. > > So, please take a look at my perf/core branch, hopefully my mistake was > just on the message saying I would apply v2, check that v3 was what I > applied.
The correct version was applied - thanks.
Mathieu
> > - Arnaldo
| |