linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/4] perf, tools, stat: Abstract stat metrics printing

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sat, 8 Aug 2015 19:40:32 +0200
From:	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
To:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Cc:	acme@...nel.org, jolsa@...nel.org, eranian@...gle.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] perf, tools, stat: Abstract stat metrics printing

On Tue, Aug 04, 2015 at 02:41:11AM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > 
> > because we already need to make the print_metric callback global,
> > would it be better to make this struct global, having all the
> > needed callbacks defined within? something like:
> 
> It's actually not global, but static.
> 
> I skipped this change. After some other changes there is only
> a single function call with these arguments left, so it's not 
> an issue to pass it around.

hum, I dont understand.. I can se the same code in the new version:


+typedef void (*print_metric_t)(void *ctx, const char *color, const char *unit,
+                              const char *fmt, double val);
+
 void perf_stat__reset_shadow_stats(void);
 void perf_stat__update_shadow_stats(struct perf_evsel *counter, u64 *count,
                                    int cpu);
-void perf_stat__print_shadow_stats(FILE *out, struct perf_evsel *evsel,
-                                  double avg, int cpu, enum aggr_mode aggr);
+void perf_stat__print_shadow_stats(struct perf_evsel *evsel,
+                                  double avg, int cpu,
+                                  print_metric_t print_metric,
+                                  void (*new_line)(void *ctx),
+                                  void *ctx);


both:

print_metric_t print_metric
void (*new_line)(void *ctx)

are still there.. what single function call did you mean?

jirka
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/