* Ingo Molnar <[email protected]> wrote:
> ... but back then I didn't feel like complicating an error recovery ABI for
> the
> needs of the 1%, robust error handling is all about simplicity: if it's not
> simple, tools won't use it.
And note that it needs to be 'simple' in two places for usage to grow
naturally:
- the usage site in the kernel
- the tooling side that recovers the information.
That's why I think that such a form:
return err_str(-EINVAL, "x86/perf: CPU does not support precise
sampling");
is obviously simple on the kernel side as it returns -EINVAL, and is very
simple
on the tooling side as well, if we are allowed to extend prctl().
Thanks,
Ingo
--
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/
