Re: [PATCH 3/3] perf, tool: Add new event group management

[Ingo Molnar]

* Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Em Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 08:56:34AM +0100, Ingo Molnar escreveu:
> > 
> > * Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 
> > > Em Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 01:15:10PM +0100, Ingo Molnar escreveu:
> > > > * Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > > I would much prefer a syntax that's more natural but requires 
> > > > > quoting than one that's quirky and tailor made to avoid 
> > > > > whatever current bash does. For one, there's other shells out 
> > > > > there that might have different quoting needs and bash is of 
> > > > > course free to extend its syntax.
> > > > 
> > > > Well, they are unlikely to extend to '+', it would break a 
> > > > boatload of scripts I suspect.
> > > > 
> > > > So the question would be, is a+b+c as event grouping a natural 
> > > > syntax? If not then lets use a quoted one that is.
> > > 
> > >    -e groupname=event1,event2,event3
> > > 
> > > Seems intuitive, no?
> > 
> > Hm, if there's no use for 'groupname' later on then it's a 
> > needlessly unspecified dimension. If this variant is picked then 
> > I'd suggest to make it a fixed:
> > 
> >   -e group=event1,event2,event3
> > 
> > kind of thing instead.
> 
> Jiri mentioned a use for the group name, no?

Only for perf stat output, right?

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/