From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from szxga01-in.huawei.com (szxga01-in.huawei.com [45.249.212.187]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8398020FD; Fri, 19 Jan 2024 03:57:50 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.249.212.187 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1705636673; cv=none; b=Y4dGJ1h/PIXsiyZ3cvrQFUGFCAtoGOFYH67/ra/vAewgC3nrbrtc/h8tLxq5400MqSyg4Qgx2GSuaypM8W8gsBhsSRCNXGVZ6d1Mh6AKUo/nC5E04tnrBWBCQVtdKuWJ6gvdeEVovME5Wfhu4jRd/rHVSUqxHT/rEacNdX0dw9o= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1705636673; c=relaxed/simple; bh=NBKvgI5HSxtduWQiJb/Ch3YQr7bTq4KrbWIfuRq0X50=; h=Date:From:To:CC:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=EQKo6ChzPWBJJzPUdzg+1XgwyCesN5AeR5vP390cct9zh0dBEIcgSPgRnwapuxnbjzLTLQRpvtEiARvz7drvn5NnYgOIO8JJXf/l7w5TP01426JJF86gwGaYFNv4kYE4cqb/uW/2wcrStYtMERXkh1yS1IxHN4FhJv2LtIQpXQk= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=huawei.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com; arc=none smtp.client-ip=45.249.212.187 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=huawei.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com Received: from mail.maildlp.com (unknown [172.19.163.252]) by szxga01-in.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4TGQlS1k6kzvTqp; Fri, 19 Jan 2024 11:56:20 +0800 (CST) Received: from kwepemd100002.china.huawei.com (unknown [7.221.188.184]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A95A51800C4; Fri, 19 Jan 2024 11:57:46 +0800 (CST) Received: from M910t (10.110.54.157) by kwepemd100002.china.huawei.com (7.221.188.184) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.2.1258.28; Fri, 19 Jan 2024 11:57:45 +0800 Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2024 11:57:35 +0800 From: Changbin Du To: Adrian Hunter CC: Changbin Du , Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Mark Rutland , Alexander Shishkin , Jiri Olsa , Namhyung Kim , Ian Rogers , , , Andi Kleen , Thomas Richter , Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/5] perf: script: add field 'insn_disam' to display mnemonic instructions Message-ID: <20240119035735.y427wcmsm7dow6h4@M910t> References: <20240118041224.2799393-1-changbin.du@huawei.com> <20240118041224.2799393-4-changbin.du@huawei.com> <5766b575-e2db-4a56-9808-31a64bc72402@intel.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5766b575-e2db-4a56-9808-31a64bc72402@intel.com> X-ClientProxiedBy: dggems702-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.179) To kwepemd100002.china.huawei.com (7.221.188.184) On Thu, Jan 18, 2024 at 09:49:41PM +0200, Adrian Hunter wrote: > On 18/01/24 06:12, Changbin Du wrote: > > In addition to the 'insn' field, this adds a new field 'insn_disam' to > > display mnemonic instructions instead of the raw code. > > 'disam' seems an unusual abbreviation, and the 'insn' part seems a bit > redundant. Could this be just 'disasm' instead of 'insn_disam'? Personally, I'd preserve the insn_ prefix. So we have two related fields 'insn' and 'insn_disasm'. -- Cheers, Changbin Du