On Thu, Feb 09, 2017 at 09:00:35AM -0800, Andi Kleen wrote: > On Thu, Feb 09, 2017 at 12:39:37PM +0100, Jiri Olsa wrote: > > and this makes me think, that this is not the right approach > > > > adding extra copy of an event when you want to add new expression? > > I don't want to add new expressions. > > I don't even need arbitrary expressions, just DividedBy > to get percentages, you just forced me to do the expressions. > > > > why can't we have another list/file of those expressions > > The last time I proposed separate files Ingo vetoed it. > He wanted everything built in.
sure, he veto it for event files.. expressions could be built in same way as we have events now > > from which point we could point and configure events we need > > If you want full flexibility you can use your perf stat report > approach, or what most people do is to just run a script/spreadsheet > over the the -x; output. This all continues to work. > > This is just a minimum approach to provide some convenience > integrated with the event list to provide something similar > as the built in expressions in stat-shadow. > > It's not trying to build the great perf scripting language. yea I understand that but can't ack that based on the points I descibed in my other email jirka
