Hello, On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 10:07:28AM -0700, Namhyung Kim wrote: > Hello, > > On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 11:11 PM Aditya Gupta <adit...@linux.ibm.com> wrote: > > > > <...> > > > > Proposed solution > > ================= > > > > As suggested by contributors in: > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-perf-users/zmpwk5k63tadm...@kernel.org/ > > > > Introduce a subcommand "perf build --has", with which > > scripts can test for presence of a feature, such as: > > > > perf build --has HAVE_FEATURE > > > > <...> > > I'm not sure 'perf build' is a good name, it sounds like it needs to build > something. Maybe 'perf check --feature XXX' ? > > Then we can extend the perf check command to *check* system > settings like perf_event_paranoid, kptr_restrict, nmi_watchdog > and so on, and possibly provides some advice or even change > the values easily. > > What do you think? >
Sure, the said confusion due to 'build' makes sense. I will discuss with athira also and post a V2 with suggested change. And, since a new subcommand is being introduced, where do I add a documentation, such that it can be visible in a manpage etc, similar to perf-version(1) ? Thanks, Aditya Gupta
