Re: [PATCH 04/11] trace-cmd: Extract parse_record_options() from trace_record()

2017-11-29 Thread Vladislav Valtchev
On Wed, 2017-11-29 at 09:53 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Tue, 28 Nov 2017 20:17:46 +0200 > Vladislav Valtchev wrote: > > > On Tue, 2017-11-28 at 11:48 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > > > > > Is there a reason that init_instance() isn't called in > > > init_common_record_context()? > > >

Re: [PATCH 04/11] trace-cmd: Extract parse_record_options() from trace_record()

2017-11-29 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Tue, 28 Nov 2017 20:17:46 +0200 Vladislav Valtchev wrote: > On Tue, 2017-11-28 at 11:48 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > > > Is there a reason that init_instance() isn't called in > > init_common_record_context()? > > > > Hi Steven, > > init_instance() has been put into init_common_recor

Re: [PATCH 04/11] trace-cmd: Extract parse_record_options() from trace_record()

2017-11-28 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Tue, 28 Nov 2017 20:57:13 +0200 Vladislav Valtchev wrote: > On Tue, 2017-11-28 at 13:30 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > On Tue, 28 Nov 2017 20:17:46 +0200 > > Vladislav Valtchev wrote: > > > > > Since that code was profile-specific, I put it in trace_profile(), > > > without 'if' statemen

Re: [PATCH 04/11] trace-cmd: Extract parse_record_options() from trace_record()

2017-11-28 Thread Vladislav Valtchev
On Tue, 2017-11-28 at 13:30 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Tue, 28 Nov 2017 20:17:46 +0200 > Vladislav Valtchev wrote: > > > Since that code was profile-specific, I put it in trace_profile(), > > without 'if' statements, clearly. > > This is all about balancing. You were able to remove one if

Re: [PATCH 04/11] trace-cmd: Extract parse_record_options() from trace_record()

2017-11-28 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Tue, 28 Nov 2017 20:17:46 +0200 Vladislav Valtchev wrote: > Since that code was profile-specific, I put it in trace_profile(), > without 'if' statements, clearly. This is all about balancing. You were able to remove one if statement, but required two function calls by all others. -- Steve

Re: [PATCH 04/11] trace-cmd: Extract parse_record_options() from trace_record()

2017-11-28 Thread Vladislav Valtchev
On Tue, 2017-11-28 at 11:48 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > Is there a reason that init_instance() isn't called in > init_common_record_context()? > Hi Steven, init_instance() has been put into init_common_record_context() later, in patch 8, "Making start,extract,stream,profile separate funcs"

Re: [PATCH 04/11] trace-cmd: Extract parse_record_options() from trace_record()

2017-11-28 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Thu, 23 Nov 2017 18:33:28 +0200 "Vladislav Valtchev (VMware)" wrote: > In this patch a huge part of trace_record(), dealing with parsing the command > line options, has been extracted in a separate function. That allows the body > of trace_record() to be focused only on the proper actions invo

[PATCH 04/11] trace-cmd: Extract parse_record_options() from trace_record()

2017-11-23 Thread Vladislav Valtchev (VMware)
In this patch a huge part of trace_record(), dealing with parsing the command line options, has been extracted in a separate function. That allows the body of trace_record() to be focused only on the proper actions involved in a given type of tracing (record, stream, etc.) reducing, this way, the s