Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/8] perf: Separate out trace-cmd parse-eventsfrom perf files

[Steven Rostedt]

On Thu, 2011-08-18 at 10:37 -0600, David Ahern wrote:
> On 08/18/2011 07:51 AM, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:

> I guess to be more specific about next steps:
> - should trace-cmd be moved to the tools directory in the kernel repo?

Nah, I rather keep it out of the kernel for now.

> that would allow code movement to a lib directory and work to be done on
> both trace-cmd and perf
> - what's the conclusion about the name and path for the common parsing
> code? seems like libtraceevent or libtraceparse had the fewest collisions

I guess libtraceparse is fine. Or maybe even libtraceparser.


> - should the plugin code be moved into its own directory - e.g.,
> tools/lib/trace-plugins. I am working on plugin changes too (eg.,
> resolving guest RIPs to symbols in the kvm plugin).

I think it should have its own directory. Or maybe even have it within
the kernel proper itself?  Have it install like modules:

/lib/modules/v3.0-rc2/plugins/

??


> 
> The current patch set from Steve needs some updates (in addition to what
> is needed for perf to use the plugins) to handle trace-cmd and perf
> differences, but this is getting far down the path.

I'm currently working on other things, and I'm waiting for consensus
before I waste more time on it.

Don't worry about trace-cmd. If libtraceparser becomes an installed
library, I'll have trace-cmd use it directly. As long as the library
stays generic (which it should) this should not cause any issues. For
now, trace-cmd will keep its original libparsevents, and I can update
that until we have this library in distributions.

Thanks!

-- Steve


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/