From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757509Ab1ANCmR (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Jan 2011 21:42:17 -0500 Received: from mail9.hitachi.co.jp ([133.145.228.44]:35652 "EHLO mail9.hitachi.co.jp" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752291Ab1ANCmN (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Jan 2011 21:42:13 -0500 X-AuditID: b753bd60-9e55eba000000f65-85-4d2fb8027156 Message-ID: <4D2FB7FD.3020004@hitachi.com> Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2011 11:42:05 +0900 From: Masami Hiramatsu Organization: Systems Development Lab., Hitachi, Ltd., Japan User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; ja; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101207 Thunderbird/3.1.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Franck Bui-Huu Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Ingo Molnar , Steven Rostedt , Srikar Dronamraju , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, 2nddept-manager@sdl.hitachi.co.jp, Peter Zijlstra , Paul Mackerras , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Chase Douglas Subject: Re: [PATCH -perf/perf/core 5/6] perf probe: Add variable filter support References: <20110113124548.22426.11201.stgit@ltc236.sdl.hitachi.co.jp> <20110113124624.22426.72527.stgit@ltc236.sdl.hitachi.co.jp> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-2022-JP Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== X-FMFTCR: RANGEB Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org (2011/01/14 6:18), Franck Bui-Huu wrote: > Masami Hiramatsu writes: > >> Add filters support for available variable list. >> Default filter is "!__k???tab_*&!__crc_*" for >> filtering out automatically generated symbols. >> >> The format of filter rule is "[!]GLOBPATTERN", so >> you can use wild cards. If the filter rule starts with >> '!', matched variables are filter out. >> >> e.g.) >> # perf probe -V schedule --externs --filter=cpu* > > I'm wondering if the different syntax below could be simpler: > > $ perf probe add > $ perf probe del > $ perf probe show > > $ perf probe list > ... --vars[=] [--externs] > ... --funcs[=] Hm, well, if no one complains about changing the syntax of perf probe, it may make things simple (maybe we'll also have to drop "perf probe " syntax). Nowadays we already have perf-kvm, perf-sched, etc. which use sub-sub commands. IMHO, for avoiding confusion old options and "perf-list", below sub-sub commands are more suitable. $ perf probe add $ perf probe del $ perf probe list $ perf probe lines $ perf probe vars [--filter=|-F ] [--extern] $ perf probe funcs [--filter=|-F ] Thank you, -- Masami HIRAMATSU 2nd Dept. Linux Technology Center Hitachi, Ltd., Systems Development Laboratory E-mail: masami.hiramatsu.pt@hitachi.com