Em Wed, May 30, 2018 at 09:30:50AM +0300, Adrian Hunter escreveu: > On 29/05/18 16:48, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > > We've made tools/perf/check-headers.sh the mechanism to check > > for drift on kernel file copies we have in tools/, and it assumes that > > if we have tools/a/b/c/d, then it came from a/b/c/d in the kernel > > sources, e.g. a copy of the kernel's arch/x86/lib/x86-opcode-map.txt > > would be in tools/arch/x86/lib/x86-opcode-map.txt.
> > That is not the case with the intel-pt-decoder, so I'm thinking > > about moving those files to comply with the model used for other copies, > > as having it in util/intel-pt-decoder/ isn't strictly required, i.e. > > those files could conceivably be used for other purposes besides > > decoding intel-pt traces, say for disassembly/annotate, that albeit not > > planned (at least by me) for the near future, would be something > > interesting to investigate doing. > > IIRC Ingo was the one to point me out this, and now I saw the > > warning about it being different flying by in the middle of the build, > > differently from what is done by check-headers.sh, that is to show > > everything that drifted in one single block, at the start of the build. > > So unless you have a strong objection to this, I'll continue > > investigation about how do do it with tools/perf/check-headers.sh, > I have no objection but currently it is (theoretically) possible to compile > Intel PT decoding support into perf script and perf report for any > architecture. i.e. decoding Intel PT from a perf.data file does not depend > on the build architecture. Right, being on the tools/arch/ will not preclude it from being built and linked in the other arches, I'll make sure it continues being built there as well. Thanks! - Arnaldo
