Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 23 Nov 2013 14:12:43 +0100 | From | Borislav Petkov <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] perf: Move fs.* to generic lib/lk/ |
| |
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 04:54:25PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > comet:~/tip/tools/perf> ls util/*.h > util/annotate.h util/data.h util/fs.h util/parse-events-bison.h util/probe-event.h util/sort.h util/thread.h util/values.h > util/build-id.h util/debug.h util/header.h util/parse-events-flex.h util/probe-finder.h util/stat.h util/thread_map.h util/vdso.h > util/cache.h util/dso.h util/help.h util/parse-events.h util/pstack.h util/strbuf.h util/tool.h util/xyarray.h > util/callchain.h util/dwarf-aux.h util/hist.h util/parse-options.h util/quote.h util/strfilter.h util/top.h > util/cgroup.h util/event.h util/intlist.h util/perf_regs.h util/rblist.h util/strlist.h util/trace-event.h > util/color.h util/evlist.h util/levenshtein.h util/pmu-bison.h util/run-command.h util/svghelper.h util/types.h > util/comm.h util/evsel.h util/machine.h util/pmu-flex.h util/session.h util/symbol.h util/unwind.h > util/cpumap.h util/exec_cmd.h util/map.h util/pmu.h util/sigchain.h util/target.h util/util.h > > That is pretty healty granularity IMO. > > Do we want a separate directory for each one?
For each single one of them? This would be insane.
> I don't see a big problem with doing that, but it could be kept in > tools/lib/util/ or tools/lib/core/ as well,
That's much better :)
> _as long as they are not lumped together
Why not a single .a?
> and as long as the individual .h files are kept_.
This has never stood for debate - headers are kept as is.
> That also means that these bits shouldn't really be librarized in the > classical sense into a single .a and linked into whatever tool uses > it, but should be used individually as singular targets with clean .h > interfaces to utilize them topically.
Yeah, but why?
> That also means that utilities won't run into any dependency problems, > and the build will be faster as well as it all will be a single > dependency graph within a single make session.
That's maybe the only half-reason for not lumping them together I've read so far. I say half-reason because the preprocessor already will include only stuff it needs. And if that were a problem, glibc would've been multiple libs too.
-- Regards/Gruss, Boris.
Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine. --
| |