On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 7:44 AM, Jiri Olsa <jo...@redhat.com> wrote: > On Tue, Dec 02, 2014 at 06:09:35PM -0800, Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote: >> From: Cody P Schafer <c...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> >> >> Enable event specification like: >> >> pmu/event_name,param1=0x1,param2=0x4/ >> >> Assuming that >> >> /sys/bus/event_source/devices/pmu/events/event_name >> >> Contains something like >> >> param2=$foo,bar=1,param1=$baz > > oops.. sorry to be PITA on this one.. I might have missed something > in the previous discussion but I guess I might have finally some > opinion on this ;-) > > here's how I think your patchset works: > > in /sys/bus/event_source/devices/pmu/events/event_name you can actually have: > > param2=foo,bar=1,param1=baz > > notice no '$', thats what you add later in 'perf list' output, right? > > Moreover it actually does not matter whats in value 'param2=HERE', > because it's not used in the config code at all apart from the > 'perf list' display processing. > > So when we discussed the '$' name way, I thought it'd be like: > > in /sys/bus/event_source/devices/pmu/events/event_name you have: > param2=$foo,bar=1,param1=$baz > > and on command line you'd use: > pmu/event_name,foo=0x1,bar=0x4/ > > to assign directly to the $var, which would justify the $var > syntax I think.. >
Agreed, what you've described above sounds like a good idea. Compared to monopolizing all strings (which is what I did when initialy writing this), using a '$' prefix would allow less pain when some events suddenly need non-integer parameters. > anyway we could assign directly to the param term name as you do, > but I think we just need to mark the term as parametrized, like: > > in /sys/bus/event_source/devices/pmu/events/event_name you have: > param2=?,bar=1,param1=? > > and on command line you'd use: > pmu/event_name,param2=0x1,param1=0x4/ > > while the config code would check that the param substitution is > done only for terms with '?' in value, like 'param2=?' and not > for all PARSE_EVENTS__TERM_TYPE_STR type terms (as of now) I prefer the `foo=0x1` as mentioned previously: it makes the user interface much less painful as we can have event-specific names for register/hcall fields. I'm pretty sure the code used to do this, not sure when it was removed (haven't been following this patchset closely). That said: I haven't fiddled with this code in a while (it's Suka's at this point), and there might be arguments the other way on both of those. _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev