On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 01:41:56PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> On 17/04/14 13:32, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 11:15:29AM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >> Il 24/03/2014 21:49, Christian Borntraeger ha scritto:
> >>> event_legacy_tracepoint:
> >>> +PE_NAME '-' PE_NAME ':' PE_NAME
> >>> +{
> >>> + struct parse_events_evlist *data = _data;
> >>> + struct list_head *list;
> >>> + char sys_name[strlen($1) + strlen($3) + 2];
> >>> + sprintf(&sys_name, "%s-%s", $1, $3);
> >>> +
> >>> + ALLOC_LIST(list);
> >>> + ABORT_ON(parse_events_add_tracepoint(list, &data->idx, &sys_name, $5));
> >>> + $$ = list;
> >>> +}
> >>
> >> Why isn't '-' part of PE_NAME?
> >
> > hi Paolo ;-)
> >
> > because it screws cache events parsing.. we need some code factoring
> > in this part
> >
> > Acked-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Jiri,
>
> can you handle this patch + "perf-kvm: fix of 'Min time' counting in report command" in your tree?
yep, I queued both of them
jirka
>
> >
> > it'd be nice to add test to tests/parse-events.c, probably s390 specific,
> > because the parsing code touches the tracepoint format file
>
> Alexander,
>
> can you have a look to provide a simple test for perf that checks that trace events like kvm-s390 are handled properly?
>
> Thanks
>
> Christian
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
