Re: [PATCH 1/1] rasd: Use perf_evlist__open() instead of open coded

Jiri Olsa
2014-10-14T14:22:39Z

On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 11:02:23AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> Em Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 03:56:31PM +0200, Jiri Olsa escreveu:
> > On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 09:29:57AM +0200, Jean Pihet wrote:
> > > On 10 October 2014 22:44, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 05:41:58PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > > >> That way we just make public the bare minimum that already proved to be
> > > >> useful outside tools/perf/ and over time we move stuff from
> > > >> tools/perf/util/evsel.c (and from other tools in or out perf's repo)
> > > >> into the lib.
> > > That is great!
>
> > > About rasd usage, there are some details at
> > > https://wiki.linaro.org/LEG/Engineering/Kernel/perfAndRAS#rasd_implementation.
>
> > sorry for late reply.. I was on vacation last week..
>
> > I read the rasd sources and realized we could poke this
> > from another angle.. AFAIU the work the rasd does is following:
> > - reads config file and opens configured tracepoints
> > - reads samples comming from those tracepoints and displays/writes
> > this data to the console/file
> > - is there more?
>
> > If I'm not missing anything, this is quite usefull/common usage
> > pattern which would deserve new perf command.
>
> > I can see the analogy with ftrace debugfs interface
> > - choose/enable tracepoints
> > - cat .../tracing/trace-pipe
>
> > and there could be '-d' for the command to act as daemon.
>
> Right, this is to be integrated into 'trace', i.e. to be able to ask for
> more events, some with callchains, some without, etc.
>
> We may even have something really bare bones that does what rasd.c does
> right now, to show how one can write a tool using the exported
> interfaces in tools/lib/api/, but I think that what rasd is _right now_,
> is just an attempt to use the libraries using as few as possible apis,
> right? I.e. more "meat" will be added there, no?

right.. is there more planned for RAS daemon to do? because at this
point it looks to me more like new perf functionality (in trace or
some other new command)

>
> Anyway, its beeing an interesting exercise and will result in a lot of
> untanglement, which is good in any case.

yea, I dont mind untangling the interface.. I noticed in the thread
people want this anyway - simple 'events open' interface.. I often
need something simple for test programs

jirka