Messages in this thread | | | From | Jiri Olsa <> | Date | Tue, 14 Jun 2022 14:29:06 +0200 | Subject | Re: [PATCH RESEND] Add a "-m" option to "perf buildid-list". |
| |
On Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 03:02:39PM -0700, Blake Jones wrote: > Thanks for taking a look at this! > > On Sun, Jun 12, 2022 at 3:18 PM Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@gmail.com> wrote: > > why 'modules' ? it shows all maps (including kernel) > > so perhaps -m/--maps would be better? > > I called it "modules" because it only operates on the kernel. Calling it > "maps" would suggest to me that it might also be able to show > information about the maps in perf.data files, which it can't (just as the > "-k" option only operates on the kernel). Given that, does it still seem > like "maps" would be more appropriate?
still there's kernel map included, so it's strange to me call it modules
--m/--kernel-maps ?
> > > also please state that it's from running kernel > > Happy to make this change. > > > any reason why not use the dso fields directly? > > I was just following my general software engineering instincts to > encapsulate implementation details, so that e.g. the caller doesn't need to > know about details such as the "has_build_id" boolean. I haven't made > changes to perf before, so if that's not the preferred style, I can do it > a different way.
we have some helpers for dso fields, but AFAICS long_name and has_build_id are used directly all over the place
jirka
| |