[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87txcq56co.fsf@sejong.aot.lge.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2014 14:41:43 +0900
From: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
To: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...stprotocols.net>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung.kim@....com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Arun Sharma <asharma@...com>,
Rodrigo Campos <rodrigo@...g.com.ar>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/21] perf tools: Introduce struct hist_entry_iter
On Thu, 23 Jan 2014 15:44:00 +0100, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 09:13:45AM +0900, Namhyung Kim wrote:
>> There're some duplicate code when adding hist entries. They are
>> different in that some have branch info or mem info but generally do
>> same thing. So introduce new struct hist_entry_iter and add callbacks
>> to customize each case in general way.
>>
>> The new perf_evsel__add_entry() function will look like:
>>
>> iter->prepare_entry();
>> iter->add_single_entry();
>>
>> while (iter->next_entry())
>> iter->add_next_entry();
>>
>> iter->finish_entry();
>>
>> This will help further work like the cumulative callchain patchset.
[SNIP]
>> - if (rep->hide_unresolved && !al->sym)
>> - return 0;
>
> this check seems to be missing in iter_add_single_mem_entry
Right. But afaics it's duplicate as we already check it in
process_sample_event().
Thanks,
Namhyung
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists