From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759011Ab2BOLDS (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Feb 2012 06:03:18 -0500 Received: from merlin.infradead.org ([205.233.59.134]:54786 "EHLO merlin.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754399Ab2BOLDR convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Feb 2012 06:03:17 -0500 Message-ID: <1329303788.2293.37.camel@twins> Subject: Re: [PATCHv4 0/9] perf tool: parser generator for events parsing From: Peter Zijlstra To: Jiri Olsa Cc: acme@redhat.com, mingo@elte.hu, paulus@samba.org, cjashfor@linux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2012 12:03:08 +0100 In-Reply-To: <20120215090439.GA1664@m.brq.redhat.com> References: <1326717103-10287-1-git-send-email-jolsa@redhat.com> <1327674868-10486-1-git-send-email-jolsa@redhat.com> <1329236924.2293.13.camel@twins> <1329237838.2293.20.camel@twins> <1329250830.2293.24.camel@twins> <1329253030.2293.27.camel@twins> <20120215090439.GA1664@m.brq.redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.2- Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2012-02-15 at 10:04 +0100, Jiri Olsa wrote: > On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 09:57:10PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Tue, 2012-02-14 at 21:20 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > OK, this one works. the attributes thing wants NULL termination. > > > Thanks > > > for mentioning that Jiri. > > > > OK, it mostly works, except: > > > > perf record -e "cpu/config=0x108000c0/upp" ./loop_1b_locks > > > > doesn't seem to work... > > > > One thing that might be nice is not having to do =1 for single bit > > fields, so that we can write: inv,edge instead of inv=1,edge=1. > > ok, would you think there's any use for following behaviour: > whenever field is written without the assignment, all the field defined > bits are set.. regardless if it's sengle ot multiple bit field.. > > looks like this would ease the implementation a little, > not mentioning the above behaviour could be usefull ;) I'm not sure that behaviour would be useful for anything other than this, but sure -- or set the value to 1 when not set, either works.