linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] perf lock: fix sorting by wait

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

Message-ID: <20110314192303.GB9388@ghostprotocols.net>
Date:	Mon, 14 Mar 2011 16:23:03 -0300
From:	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...radead.org>
To:	Hitoshi Mitake <mitake@....info.waseda.ac.jp>
Cc:	Marcin Slusarz <marcin.slusarz@...il.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf lock: fix sorting by wait_min

Em Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 05:54:58PM +0100, Marcin Slusarz escreveu:
> On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 06:47:15PM +0100, Marcin Slusarz wrote:
> > if lock was uncontended, wait_time_min == ULLONG_MAX, so we need to handle
> > this case differently to show high wait times first
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Marcin Slusarz <marcin.slusarz@...il.com>
> > ---
> >  tools/perf/builtin-lock.c |   13 ++++++++++++-
> >  1 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/tools/perf/builtin-lock.c b/tools/perf/builtin-lock.c
> > index 0305a40..812ad26 100644
> > --- a/tools/perf/builtin-lock.c
> > +++ b/tools/perf/builtin-lock.c
> > @@ -202,9 +202,20 @@ static struct thread_stat *thread_stat_findnew_first(u32 tid)
> >  SINGLE_KEY(nr_acquired)
> >  SINGLE_KEY(nr_contended)
> >  SINGLE_KEY(wait_time_total)
> > -SINGLE_KEY(wait_time_min)
> >  SINGLE_KEY(wait_time_max)
> >  
> > +static int lock_stat_key_wait_time_min(struct lock_stat *one,
> > +					struct lock_stat *two)
> > +{
> > +	u64 s1 = one->wait_time_min;
> > +	u64 s2 = two->wait_time_min;
> > +	if (s1 == ULLONG_MAX)
> > +		s1 = 0;
> > +	if (s2 == ULLONG_MAX)
> > +		s2 = 0;
> > +	return s1 > s2;
> > +}
> > +
> >  struct lock_key {
> >  	/*
> >  	 * name: the value for specify by user
> > -- 
> 
> Anything wrong with this patch?
> I can't find it in linux-next.

Hitoshi-san, can I have your acked-by for this one?

Thanks,

- Arnaldo
--
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/