On Mon, Feb 04, 2019 at 12:05:38PM -0800, Stephane Eranian wrote: SNIP
> > > > > > > > > > > > [jolsa@krava perf]$ ll result_1/ > > > > > > total 348 > > > > > > -rw-------. 1 jolsa jolsa 27624 Feb 4 11:35 data.0 > > > > > > -rw-------. 1 jolsa jolsa 56672 Feb 4 11:35 data.1 > > > > > > -rw-------. 1 jolsa jolsa 30824 Feb 4 11:35 data.2 > > > > > > -rw-------. 1 jolsa jolsa 49136 Feb 4 11:35 data.3 > > > > > > -rw-------. 1 jolsa jolsa 22712 Feb 4 11:35 data.4 > > > > > > -rw-------. 1 jolsa jolsa 53392 Feb 4 11:35 data.5 > > > > > > -rw-------. 1 jolsa jolsa 43352 Feb 4 11:35 data.6 > > > > > > -rw-------. 1 jolsa jolsa 46688 Feb 4 11:35 data.7 > > > > > > -rw-------. 1 jolsa jolsa 9068 Feb 4 11:35 header > > > > > > > > > > Awesome. What do you think about having it like this: > > > > > > > > > > $ perf record --output result_1.data ... - writes data to a file > > > > > > > > > > $ perf record --dir result_1 ... - or even > > > > > $ perf record --output_dir result_1 ... - writes data into a > > > > > directory > > > > > > > > > > IMHO, this interface is simpler for a user. > > > > > > > > yep, seems more convenient.. I'll add it > > > > > > > But what happens if you do: perf record -o foo --output_dir foo.d? > > > > Should fail, i.e. either you use single-file or directory output, I > > think. > > > Agreed ok, will do that thanks, jirka
