From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out-189.mta1.migadu.com (out-189.mta1.migadu.com [95.215.58.189]) (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 EBCF53CD8B8 for ; Wed, 25 Mar 2026 11:25:27 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=95.215.58.189 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1774437931; cv=none; b=nbwKjhmqsjdN2Fb8+ISZLDSF9p4/o3ZvIMNTjlEdZ945v69vuaP4lj5aFbUgj06fdbopgchdD/4S2H0OgRMoq8GKJDL4QA7jTQ1Zwf42OyMw7w5jqXiThGLDENJe4Mgn5R1mxEuxIbdJZgiY0ejsJZqX1hV99zO03JzMJjYyrek= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1774437931; c=relaxed/simple; bh=nvWIcM2zPPzvNKvJb0bsDBHCgthGxUlNqNpwZbeKQrg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=WHkgQF9GA8eti/hRqSGOW0gcOqPSs4X07lWTuj15qhs11zE6tFZiJZ6ZpFOmGg3bKNmVy8Coi14gJMCHXB6Q6YdTLEfGiehzeSkMF1SFmjTMxXR+2W2JDN995QKqhkRBXKMU9I2J+gc4U/KEUqbfwUJmCMxDIz06B1C9tcUiT94= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=r-ricci.it; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=r-ricci.it; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=r-ricci.it header.i=@r-ricci.it header.b=W+6fXjp/; arc=none smtp.client-ip=95.215.58.189 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=r-ricci.it Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=r-ricci.it Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=r-ricci.it header.i=@r-ricci.it header.b="W+6fXjp/" Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2026 12:25:06 +0100 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=r-ricci.it; s=key1; t=1774437915; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=qdew8eVGud1wDcubTKQ2A+7PSIH0d5C+e8CKZRhjTKg=; b=W+6fXjp/4duUEF7F3g8cUNdeVgpxbFXsxiN8TlfyMOedvqWKQni8otR+10lW9iBC+Lt/tP lld90AVX2DFVk012VLe3bW+9PqfqmdgBXaawGTbCTvSNxgf3eaFWxFUu0ME1cJFxDmMdrT T7Nkk0jFGrGCOoSGFeEb743SMUWyL8TfdQOsSTuuBo//GmFFf/uheqhr1es0QmoHKv5mML 06E4t0n7T26Ly19AdcmM4JiehzWSBjGolcBzIh0EvYw/6v0p8AQNJZc33eid89RmUpo16G a2vrMBKW1TPqRcmFS/PY8kywBjVEs1LwF7FkcONmL5Aaak3H66+kg2VWwFqlYQ== X-Report-Abuse: Please report any abuse attempt to abuse@migadu.com and include these headers. From: Roberto Ricci To: Shuah Khan Cc: Thomas Renninger , Shuah Khan , "John B. Wyatt IV" , John Kacur , linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/4] cpupower-frequency-info.1: use the proper name of the --perf option Message-ID: References: <20260324223921.14317-1-io@r-ricci.it> <20260324223921.14317-3-io@r-ricci.it> <32cdfa7a-765c-4f74-9839-d2e0b01435dc@linuxfoundation.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@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: <32cdfa7a-765c-4f74-9839-d2e0b01435dc@linuxfoundation.org> X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT On 2026-03-24 17:06 -0600, Shuah Khan wrote: > On 3/24/26 16:39, Roberto Ricci wrote: > > The cpupower-frequency-info(1) man page describes a '--perf' option. > > Even though this form is accepted by the program, its proper name is > > '--performance'. > > > > cpufreq-info.c: > > {"performance", no_argument, NULL, 'c'}, > > [...] > > --- a/tools/power/cpupower/man/cpupower-frequency-info.1 > > +++ b/tools/power/cpupower/man/cpupower-frequency-info.1 > > @@ -53,7 +53,7 @@ human\-readable output for the \-f, \-w, \-s and \-y parameters. > > \fB\-n\fR \fB\-\-no-rounding\fR > > Output frequencies and latencies without rounding off values. > > .TP > > -\fB\-c\fR \fB\-\-perf\fR > > +\fB\-c\fR \fB\-\-performance\fR > > I would keep perf and also add performance since --perf and --performance > work - it is lot easier to type --perf --perf would still be accepted by the program, whether or not the man page mentions it. getopt_long() accepts any abbreviation which is not ambiguous. While I agree that it would be nice to remind users about abbreviations, why should the man page suggest an arbitrary one out of the many accepted? And what about the other options (such as --governors)? Suggesting an abbreviated long form only for --performance would be inconsistent. The general convention is to list the one-letter form and the complete long form. Also, if you want to save typing during interactive use, you can use -c.