Messages in this thread | | | From | Jiri Olsa <> | Date | Mon, 10 Oct 2022 16:05:54 +0200 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] perf parse: Allow names to start with digits |
| |
On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 02:38:54PM +0900, Dominique Martinet wrote: > Hi Jiri, Ian, > > Jiri Olsa wrote on Mon, Jul 04, 2022 at 01:25:28PM +0200: > > > If you're ok with that I can resend this as three patches: my original > > > patch, a patch with your diff and test_event() keeping current > > > behaviour, and a last patch adding that last flag and testing 9p without > > > format check. > > > > > > (and if you don't think it's worth checking probe existence same thing > > > but even simpler) > > > > I have that patch split into 2 separated changes, > > I'll try to send it later today > > It's been a while (I had totally forgotten), but I don't think I saw > this patch. > > For reminder you've requested that I add some test for a tracepoint > starting with digits e.g. 9p:9p_client_res but there's nothing commonly > available to use there, so you added a way to only check without > checking if a backing tracepoint exist, but I see no trace of the update > you sent here: > https://lore.kernel.org/all/YsGduWiTvkM2/tHv@krava/ > > Should I take it, do the split you suggested and send it together with a > resend of my original patch and new test?
ah, it fell through the cracks, sry.. if you could resend it, that'd be great
thanks, jirka
> > > Ian Rogers wrote on Mon, Jul 04, 2022 at 02:39:05PM -0700: > > > diff --git a/tools/perf/util/parse-events.l b/tools/perf/util/parse-events.l > > > index 5b6e4b5249cf..4133d6950d29 100644 > > > --- a/tools/perf/util/parse-events.l > > > +++ b/tools/perf/util/parse-events.l > > > @@ -211,7 +211,7 @@ bpf_source [^,{}]+\.c[a-zA-Z0-9._]* > > > num_dec [0-9]+ > > > num_hex 0x[a-fA-F0-9]+ > > > num_raw_hex [a-fA-F0-9]+ > > > -name [a-zA-Z_*?\[\]][a-zA-Z0-9_*?.\[\]!]* > > > +name [a-zA-Z0-9_*?\[\]][a-zA-Z0-9_*?.\[\]!]* > > > > Perhaps this would be cleaner as: > > name [a-zA-Z0-9_*?\[\]!]+ > > except that would allow a name to start with an exclamation. Would > > that be an issue? > > Sorry for the lack of reply -- I have no opinion on this as long as we > can use digits. > I can't imagine any probe starting with . or !, but that does not seem > to create any ambiguity with the rest of the grammar that I can see > either so I think it'd be fine, but I'm not comfortable deciding. > > > Thanks, > -- > Dominique
| |