On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 12:09 AM, Corey Ashford <cjash...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > Hi Stephane, > > I'm currently doing a "first cut" at porting Power to libpfm4 and I noticed > one thing that's a little confusing about this new API. > > The two terms "umask" and "attr" are used interchangeably, but without > really mentioning that anywhere. > attr is the generic term, it encapsulates unit masks and register filters such as priv level, invert and so on.
> I think the API should stick to using one word, either umask or attr. > Personally, I prefer "attr" because it's a bit more general purpose. > Agreed. > Is there some fine difference that I'm not perceiving between the two in > libpfm4? > > Otherwise, so far it looks very clean and easy to work with. > Thanks. Yes, I spent a lot of time cleaning the code as much as I could. I think the user-visible API is much simpler now. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with Crystal Reports now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july _______________________________________________ perfmon2-devel mailing list perfmon2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/perfmon2-devel
