On Wed, 17 Apr 2019 09:58:58 -0400 Phil Auld <pauld@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > FILTER write /sys/kernel/debug/tracing/events/sched/sched_switch/filter (len 142) value "(common_pid<21420||common_pid>21425)&&(common_pid<21265||common_pid>21418)||(next_pid<21420||next_pid>21425)&&(next_pid<21265||next_pid>21418)" > > > The latter is correct given precendce of && before || but I wonder if () don't make sense? I always have to look > that one up :) Yes, as the one who wrote the parsing code (and was lectured by Al Viro about it), I know for a fact that && has a higher precedence than the || and it should work. I was about to comment about that, but then remembered my "lesson" :-) -- Steve > > If I were writing that in code I'd probably put in the extra ()s, but since it's generated and no > one actually sees it, probably okay and simpler as is.
|