Em Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 02:12:38PM +0800, Wangnan (F) escreveu:
> On 2016/6/21 0:22, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 11:38:18AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > > Em Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 11:29:13AM +0800, Wangnan (F) escreveu:
> > > > On 2016/6/17 0:48, Arnaldo Carva
On 2016/6/21 0:22, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 11:38:18AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
Em Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 11:29:13AM +0800, Wangnan (F) escreveu:
On 2016/6/17 0:48, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
Em Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 08:02:41AM +, Wang Nan escreve
On 6/20/16 8:02 PM, Namhyung Kim wrote:
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 3:13 AM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
wrote:
Em Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 09:22:11AM -0700, Alexei Starovoitov escreveu:
On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 11:38:18AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
Doing:
perf bcc -c foo.c
Looks so
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 3:13 AM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
wrote:
> Em Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 09:22:11AM -0700, Alexei Starovoitov escreveu:
>> On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 11:38:18AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
>> > Doing:
>
>> > perf bcc -c foo.c
>
>> > Looks so much simpler and similar t
On 2016/6/20 22:38, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
Em Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 11:29:13AM +0800, Wangnan (F) escreveu:
On 2016/6/17 0:48, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
Em Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 08:02:41AM +, Wang Nan escreveu:
[SNIP]
About fallback, if user explicitly uses '.o' or '.bpf'
Em Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 12:16:55PM -0600, David Ahern escreveu:
> On 6/20/16 12:13 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > 'perf cc' seems sensible, and has the added bonus of being one letter
> > shorter :-)
> perf is now a general front-end to a compiler?
Well, it is for quite a while already,
On 6/20/16 12:13 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
'perf cc' seems sensible, and has the added bonus of being one letter
shorter :-)
perf is now a general front-end to a compiler?
Em Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 09:22:11AM -0700, Alexei Starovoitov escreveu:
> On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 11:38:18AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > Doing:
> > perf bcc -c foo.c
> > Looks so much simpler and similar to an existing compile source code
> > into object file workflow (gcc's, an
On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 11:38:18AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> Em Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 11:29:13AM +0800, Wangnan (F) escreveu:
> > On 2016/6/17 0:48, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > >Em Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 08:02:41AM +, Wang Nan escreveu:
> > >>With '--dry-run', 'perf record'
Em Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 11:29:13AM +0800, Wangnan (F) escreveu:
> On 2016/6/17 0:48, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> >Em Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 08:02:41AM +, Wang Nan escreveu:
> >>With '--dry-run', 'perf record' doesn't do reall recording. Combine with
> >>llvm.dump-obj option, --dry-run can b
On 2016/6/17 0:48, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
Em Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 08:02:41AM +, Wang Nan escreveu:
With '--dry-run', 'perf record' doesn't do reall recording. Combine with
llvm.dump-obj option, --dry-run can be used to help compile BPF objects for
embedded platform.
So these are
Em Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 01:48:15PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu:
> Em Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 08:02:41AM +, Wang Nan escreveu:
> > With '--dry-run', 'perf record' doesn't do reall recording. Combine with
> > llvm.dump-obj option, --dry-run can be used to help compile BPF objects for
>
Em Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 08:02:41AM +, Wang Nan escreveu:
> With '--dry-run', 'perf record' doesn't do reall recording. Combine with
> llvm.dump-obj option, --dry-run can be used to help compile BPF objects for
> embedded platform.
So these are nice and have value, but can we have a subcommand
With '--dry-run', 'perf record' doesn't do reall recording. Combine with
llvm.dump-obj option, --dry-run can be used to help compile BPF objects for
embedded platform.
Signed-off-by: Wang Nan
Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov
Cc: Jiri Olsa
---
tools/perf/Documentation/perf-r
14 matches
Mail list logo
