(2014/11/17 12:17), Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > (2014/11/17 12:08), Namhyung Kim wrote: >> Hi Masami, >> >> On Thu, 13 Nov 2014 00:25:57 +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: >>> (2014/11/11 22:10), Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: >>>> What I meant was, what is wrong with replacing: >>>> >>>> perf cache --probe <SPEC> # for the current kernel >>>> >>>> With: >>>> >>>> perf cache --add <PROBE-SPEC> # for the current kernel >>>> >>>> And have it figure out that what is being added is a probe and do the >>>> right thing? >>> >>> As I've said previously, PROBE-SPEC can be same as FILES (imagine that a >>> binary >>> file which has same name function in the kernel.) >>> Moreover, PROBE-SPEC requires the target binary(or kernel module) except for >>> kernel probes. In that case, anyway we need -x or -m options with file-path >>> for --add, that is very strange. >>> >>> e.g. >>> >>> For me, >>> >>> perf cache --add ./binary --probe '*' >>> >>> looks more natural than >>> >>> perf cache --add '*' -exec ./binary >>> >>> since in other cases(sdt/elf), we'll just do >>> >>> perf cache --add ./binary >> >> I prefer this too. But I'd like make the 'add' part a subcommand rather >> than option like we do in perf kmem/kvm/list/lock/mem/sched ... And it >> can handle multiple files at once. What about this? >> >> perf cache add [--elf|--sdt|--probe <spec>] <binary> [<binary>...] > > OK, that's good to me. And I think --elf/--sdt is meaningless. > Only --probe option is required, since we can scan the elf file to > add sdt cache when adding elf binary :)
BTW, what should we do if we put the probe cache on current running kernel? perf cache add --probe <probe-spec> and have no binary argument, is it OK? Thanks, -- Masami HIRAMATSU Software Platform Research Dept. Linux Technology Research Center Hitachi, Ltd., Yokohama Research Laboratory E-mail: [email protected] -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
