Re: [BUG] perf stat: explicit grouping yields unexpected results

[Stephane Eranian]

On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 12:52 PM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 11:34:05AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>> That brings up an interesting question: what is better for users, if
>> we schedule as many as we can and say 'not supported' to the rest
>> (current behavior), or if we fail the whole group?
>>
>> I'd say that the default behavior should be what Jiri implemented: get
>> the most out of the situation and inform. But you are right in that
>> 'forcing' all elements of a group to be valid should be possible as
>> well - if a special perf stat option or event format is used.
>
> So I don't agree, but if you want to keep this IMO weird behaviour at
> least WARN about it in big blinking neon letters that the user isn't
> getting what he asked for.

Agreed.
When I tested this, I already knew what to expect, that's why I was
surprised not to get any warning or error messages.
--
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/