On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 02:41:53PM -0700, David Ahern wrote:
>
>
> On 02/21/11 14:37, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>
> > The goal is actually to extend perf script to handle more than just raw data.
> > So that it can handle the rest of what we can find in an event: time, ip, stacktraces...
> >
> > You've added 200 lines in perf report to add the dump support. It wouldn't
> > require more to extend perf script to do that. And the result is going to be
> > much more powerful.
> >
> > Look at struct scripting_ops::process_event().
>
> I actually have a draft of perf-script - essentially duplicating sample
> processing done in perf-report. When it got to the point of having to
> add a lot of code -- other features essentially -- just to get it to the
> point of being ready for this feature I stopped.
I don't understand why it's harder to extend print_event() rather than
perf report.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-perf-users" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
[Linux USB Devel]
[Video for Linux]
[Linux Audio Users]
[Photo]
[Yosemite News]
[Yosemite Photos]
[Free Online Dating]
[Linux Kernel]
[Linux SCSI]
[XFree86]