This is the mail archive of the
systemtap@sourceware.org
mailing list for the systemtap project.
Re: [RFC] perf-cache command interface design
- From: Namhyung Kim <namhyung at kernel dot org>
- To: Masami Hiramatsu <masami dot hiramatsu dot pt at hitachi dot com>
- Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme at redhat dot com>, Hemant Kumar <hemant at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com>, linux-kernel at vger dot kernel dot org, srikar at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com, peterz at infradead dot org, oleg at redhat dot com, hegdevasant at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com, mingo at redhat dot com, systemtap at sourceware dot org, aravinda at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com, penberg at iki dot fi, brendan dot d dot gregg at gmail dot com, "yrl dot pp-manager dot tt\ at hitachi dot com" <yrl dot pp-manager dot tt at hitachi dot com>
- Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2014 13:41:08 +0900
- Subject: Re: [RFC] perf-cache command interface design
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <87lhnr5sbl dot fsf at sejong dot aot dot lge dot com> <54588905 dot 7040002 at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com> <5458CD15 dot 4010101 at hitachi dot com> <874muew2hk dot fsf at sejong dot aot dot lge dot com> <5459E865 dot 6050207 at hitachi dot com> <545B1DDE dot 9000202 at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com> <545C80F4 dot 4020905 at hitachi dot com> <54609A8C dot 4050308 at hitachi dot com> <20141110122321 dot GC4468 at redhat dot com> <5461B276 dot 50004 at hitachi dot com> <20141111131030 dot GG4468 at redhat dot com> <54637C05 dot 5090807 at hitachi dot com> <87oas6ttf8 dot fsf at sejong dot aot dot lge dot com> <546968CB dot 1070802 at hitachi dot com>
Hi Masami,
On Mon, 17 Nov 2014 12:17:31 +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> (2014/11/17 12:08), Namhyung Kim wrote:
>> I prefer this too. But I'd like make the 'add' part a subcommand rather
>> than option like we do in perf kmem/kvm/list/lock/mem/sched ... And it
>> can handle multiple files at once. What about this?
>>
>> perf cache add [--elf|--sdt|--probe <spec>] <binary> [<binary>...]
>
> OK, that's good to me. And I think --elf/--sdt is meaningless.
Maybe not :)
I'm considering the opposite side - by providing the options, we also
support the negative ones too. So --no-elf and/or --no-sdt options are
possible. Also the positive options can be used with del(ete)
subcommand to remove some contents selectively.
I think it'd be helpful as we sometimes don't want to do that for some
reason. For example, current perf record adds binary (elf) files to the
cache automatically iff it's accessed. But what about SDTs? Should we
add SDTs at the same time? If not, what if we try to add existing elf
files only for SDTs?
Thanks,
Namhyung
> Only --probe option is required, since we can scan the elf file to
> add sdt cache when adding elf binary :)