On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 09:15:23AM +0200, Stephane Eranian wrote: > On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 1:05 PM, Jiri Olsa <jo...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Jul 06, 2012 at 03:42:54AM +0200, Stephane Eranian wrote: > > > On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 3:32 AM, Ulrich Drepper <drep...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 12:15 PM, Stephane Eranian <eran...@google.com> > > > > wrote: > > > >> I don't understand why you actually need the :2 suffix. There can > > > >> only be one leader. So assume it is the first one. Users have to > > > >> know the first one is the leader which seems like a natural thing > > > >> to do for me. It would make you syntax less ugly than it already > > > >> is. > > > > > > > > In a blue sky world I would have done this. In fact, this is what I > > > > tried before reading the sources to find out there is no group support > > > > so far. But given that multiple -e options already have a meaning I > > > > would be hesitant to change this. > > > > > > That's why I said you activate grouping via -e only when you have > > > the --group-events or --group-reads option in front. That would > > > not change the meaning of the multiple -e when none of those > > > group options are specified. > > > > I discussed this with peter.. > > > > <peterz> the {} thing allows: 1) multiple groups in a single -e, 2) group > > attributes > > > And what's the value of 1) exactly? What's wrong with passing multiple -e ? > The only group attribute I can think of would be :u, :k. Not so much typing. > > > as for the leader sampling, we can have the first event to become the leader > > by default (omit the leader index modifier) and enable the leader sampling > > by > > another modifier: > > > I don't understand this sentence. > > > <peterz> right, just make it a single 'l' (el not one) to indicate 'leader' > > sampling > > > To me ,this looks a bit of an over-engineered design and it is not based on > any actual user requests. Don't get me wrong, grouping is useful and required > but nobody has ever asked for that level of flexibility. The syntax you have > now is already very rich for my taste.
Well, I personally like the '{}' syntax more than '--group-events or --group-reads option in front', it feels more user friendly.. anyway, we can easily have both ways. As for the group attributes and group leader sampling, I don't mind omitting them at this point and get back to that if we find it useful in future. jirka -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/