On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 02:03:36PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <a...@ghostprotocols.net> wrote: > > > Em Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 01:22:27PM -0600, David Ahern escreveu: > > > On 10/25/13 1:09 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > > > >>>I think I did with the second follow up patch: -ga -ag -g fp -g > > > >>>dwarf should all work properly with fp the default for -g. > > > > > >>Acked-by: Ingo Molnar <mi...@kernel.org> > > > > > >Can I have this one submitted? > > > > > Upon further review, Jiri was correct: that patch handles some of > > > the old cases fine, but did not handle others. ie., it just moved > > > the bad syntax problem around. > > > > perhaps we can do, at least for now, with what Ingo suggested? > > > > Namely, having: > > > > --call-graph Require an argument, either "dwarf" or "fp" > > -g Doesn't require anything, uses whatever is configured, > > fp if no explicit config is done in places like > > ~/.perfconfig > > > > Fits with what most people do usually, no? > > Please do this! Usability sucks right now, going from '-g' to > '-g <foo>' was an incompatible change, a regression I argue, > which should be fixed in an urgent branch ASAP.
about to finish patches with that, will send it soon jirka -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
