Re: [PATCH 08/10] perf tool: Unify handling of features when writing feature section

[Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com>]

Em Tue, Dec 06, 2011 at 05:33:58PM +0100, Robert Richter escreveu:
> On 06.12.11 11:36:30, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > If you fix that please add this warning as well when no build-ids are
> > found, which hopefully is the odd case these days as all distros I'm
> > aware of have build-ids in all DSOs.
> 
> What about the following change in addition? perf record then still
> stops with an error, but --no-buildid could be used to proceed anyway:
> 
> diff --git a/tools/perf/builtin-record.c b/tools/perf/builtin-record.c
> index 766fa0a..80e08ca 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/builtin-record.c
> +++ b/tools/perf/builtin-record.c
> @@ -493,6 +493,13 @@ static int __cmd_record(struct perf_record *rec, int argc, const char **argv)
>                         return err;
>         }
>  
> +       if (!no_buildid
> +           && !perf_header__has_feat(&session->header, HEADER_BUILD_ID)) {
> +               pr_err("Couldn't collect buildids. "
                         "Your report results may be misleading if profiled "
                         "DSOs changed after the record session.\n"
> +                      "Use --no-buildid option if you know that "
                         "there where no changes in the profiled DSOs.\n");
> +               return -1;
> +       }
> +
>         rec->post_processing_offset = lseek(output, 0, SEEK_CUR);

I can do these changes if you agree with this wording,

- Arnaldo