Re: [PATCH RESEND] Add a "-m" option to "perf buildid-list".

[Jiri Olsa]

On Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 03:02:39PM -0700, Blake Jones wrote:
> Thanks for taking a look at this!
> 
> On Sun, Jun 12, 2022 at 3:18 PM Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > why 'modules' ? it shows all maps (including kernel)
> > so perhaps -m/--maps would be better?
> 
>  I called it "modules" because it only operates on the kernel. Calling it
> "maps" would suggest to me that it might also be able to show
> information about the maps in perf.data files, which it can't (just as the
> "-k" option only operates on the kernel). Given that, does it still seem
> like "maps" would be more appropriate?

still there's kernel map included, so it's strange to me call it modules

  --m/--kernel-maps ?

> 
> > also please state that it's from running kernel
> 
> Happy to make this change.
> 
> > any reason why not use the dso fields directly?
> 
> I was just following my general software engineering instincts to
> encapsulate implementation details, so that e.g. the caller doesn't need to
> know about details such as the "has_build_id" boolean. I haven't made
> changes to perf before, so if that's not the preferred style, I can do it
> a different way.

we have some helpers for dso fields, but AFAICS long_name and has_build_id
are used directly all over the place

jirka