Re: RFP: Fixing "-ga -ag -g fp -g dwarf" was Re: [PATCHSET 0/8] perftools: Fix scalability problem on callchain merging (v5)

From: Ingo Molnar
Date: Sat Oct 26 2013 - 08:03:44 EST

* Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Em Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 01:22:27PM -0600, David Ahern escreveu:
> > On 10/25/13 1:09 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > >>>I think I did with the second follow up patch: -ga -ag -g fp -g
> > >>>dwarf should all work properly with fp the default for -g.
> > >>Acked-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > >Can I have this one submitted?
> > Upon further review, Jiri was correct: that patch handles some of
> > the old cases fine, but did not handle others. ie., it just moved
> > the bad syntax problem around.
> perhaps we can do, at least for now, with what Ingo suggested?
> Namely, having:
> --call-graph Require an argument, either "dwarf" or "fp"
> -g Doesn't require anything, uses whatever is configured,
> fp if no explicit config is done in places like
> ~/.perfconfig
> Fits with what most people do usually, no?

Please do this! Usability sucks right now, going from '-g' to
'-g <foo>' was an incompatible change, a regression I argue,
which should be fixed in an urgent branch ASAP.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at