linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 4/5] perf report: Show branch type statistics for stdio mode

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:   Wed, 19 Apr 2017 12:11:49 +0800
From:   "Jin, Yao" <yao.jin@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
Cc:     acme@...nel.org, jolsa@...nel.org, peterz@...radead.org,
        mingo@...hat.com, alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com,
        Linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ak@...ux.intel.com,
        kan.liang@...el.com, yao.jin@...el.com,
        linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 4/5] perf report: Show branch type statistics for stdio
 mode



On 4/19/2017 8:53 AM, Jin, Yao wrote:
>
>
> On 4/19/2017 2:53 AM, Jiri Olsa wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 06:21:05AM +0800, Jin Yao wrote:
>>
>> SNIP
>>
>>> +const char *branch_type_name(int type)
>>> +{
>>> +    const char *branch_names[PERF_BR_MAX] = {
>>> +        "N/A",
>>> +        "JCC",
>>> +        "JMP",
>>> +        "IND_JMP",
>>> +        "CALL",
>>> +        "IND_CALL",
>>> +        "RET",
>>> +        "SYSCALL",
>>> +        "SYSRET",
>>> +        "IRQ",
>>> +        "INT",
>>> +        "IRET",
>>> +        "FAR_BRANCH",
>>> +    };
>>> +
>>> +    if ((type >= 0) && (type < PERF_BR_MAX))
>>> +        return branch_names[type];
>>> +
>>> +    return NULL;
>> looks like we should add util/branch.c with above functions
>> and merge it with util/parse-branch-options.c
>>
>> we create new file even for less code ;-)
>>
>> thanks,
>> jirka
>
> Could we directly add branch_type_name() in util/parse-branch-options.c?
>
> I just feel it's a bit waste of creating a new file for less code. :)
>
> Thanks
> Jin Yao

After considering again, yes, creating util/branch.c should be better. I 
will do that.

Thanks
Jin Yao