On Wed, 19 Nov 2014 14:32:08 +0000, Kan Liang wrote:
>> On Tue, 18 Nov 2014 16:36:55 -0500, kan liang wrote:
>> > + if (attr->exclude_user) {
>> > + attr->exclude_user = 0;
>> > +
>> > + pr_warning("LBR callstack option is only
>> > available"
>> > + " to get user callchain information."
>> > + " Force exclude_user to 0.\n");
>> > + }
>>
>> I'm not sure what's in a higher priority - maybe I missed earlier discussion.
>> IOW what about this?
>>
>> if (attr->exclude_user) {
>> pr_warning("LBR callstack option is only
>> available"
>> " to get user callchain
>> information.\n");
>
> I think either is fine. I'd like to add more info "Falling back to
> framepointers."
> based on your changes.
> So the user know what they will get then.
>
> What do you think?
Looks good to me. But I still slightly prefer not to override user
settings. But it's not a strong opinion though - I'd like to here from
others.
Thanks,
Namhyung
>
> pr_warning("LBR callstack option is only available"
> " to get user callchain information."
> " Falling back to framepointers.\n");
>
> pr_ warning ("Cannot use LBR callstack with branch stack"
> " Falling back to framepointers.\n");
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
