From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com>
To: Arun Kalyanasundaram <arunkaly@google.com>
Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
Tom Zanussi <tzanussi@gmail.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
David Carrillo-Cisneros <davidcc@google.com>
Subject: Re: perf script: Question: Python trace processing script contains the tid of the process in the common_pid attribute
Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2017 12:18:00 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170707151800.GC3734@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAGjB_Bq3QLowpN2o_G5WBVzU6mNerErTP1emiBEryKjaqtdqyA@mail.gmail.com>
Em Wed, Jul 05, 2017 at 04:51:26PM -0700, Arun Kalyanasundaram escreveu:
> Arnaldo:
> So, I think what you are suggesting is, we should check the signature
> of the hook to determine if it has an additional attribute and only
> then should we provide the dict. May be something like this:
>
> PyObject* custom_dict = PyObject_GetAttrString(handler, "other_fields_dict");
> if (custom_dict)
> //Add dict to PyTuple
>
> Do you think this would be a better approach?
I think that we should provide as much as possible the common info about
a sample at all the sample processing routines, be it the initial,
tracepoint specific one, the one for non-tracepoint samples and the
trace_unhandled one.
So scripts not using this optional argument will work with older
versions of the perf tool as well as with new ones that support it.
One could say that to use a script that wants this optional argument, a
new enough version of the tool is required.
So yeah, I think this is a better approach. The details of how to best
do this method signature signing need to be figured out, of course.
Thanks for working on this!
- Arnaldo
prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-07-07 15:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <CAGjB_Bp0haKX+YPC5117yK440mTK1ZW3WBubt616hbKaQNxd6w@mail.gmail.com>
2017-07-01 14:47 ` perf script: Question: Python trace processing script contains the tid of the process in the common_pid attribute Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2017-07-05 16:22 ` Arun Kalyanasundaram
2017-07-05 19:25 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2017-07-05 19:26 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2017-07-05 20:41 ` Arun Kalyanasundaram
2017-07-05 23:51 ` Arun Kalyanasundaram
2017-07-07 15:18 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20170707151800.GC3734@redhat.com \
--to=acme@redhat.com \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=arunkaly@google.com \
--cc=davidcc@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tzanussi@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox