[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [linuxtools-dev] cachegrind
- From: Daniel HB <danielhb@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2012 12:21:11 -0300
- Delivered-to: firstname.lastname@example.org
On Tue, 2012-04-24 at 11:14 -0400, Andrew Overholt wrote:
> * Daniel HB <danielhb@xxxxxxxxxx> [2012-04-24 11:06]:
> > On Tue, 2012-04-24 at 10:45 -0400, Andrew Overholt wrote:
> > > > >I've been asked multiple times about post-mortem support for the
> > > > >LinuxTools.
> > > >
> > > > I personaly think that it's useful in all cases.
> > >
> > > I agree it's very useful and would love to see us support it. It just
> > > wasn't part of the original workflows of a lot of the plugins we have.
> > A good start would be, for example, not wiping out previous profiling
> > results from the view. We can "store" the last N results for the same
> > profiling.
> Yes, this is good.
I just want to make internet justice and mention that this is Wainer
Moschetta's idea. We were discussing this thread on IBM IRC and he came
up with this argument of comparing previous profiling results. I forgot
to mention that in that email :)
> > For opening any random profile maybe we can create a new perspective
> > called "Profile Viewer", which won't consider any project or workspace
> > setting, where you have the freedom to open up any profile data file
> > from the file system just for view.
> I would rather see the same view used and just have some sort of session
> markings showing which data is driving the current visualization.
That can work too if we manage to make it very clear that the profile
view being displayed is not related at all with the current working C/C
> linuxtools-dev mailing list
Daniel Henrique Barboza
Software Engineer - Linux Technology Center Brazil