[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <37D7C6CF3E00A74B8858931C1DB2F077015C6DF9@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2014 13:31:48 +0000
From: "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@...el.com>
To: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
CC: "acme@...nel.org" <acme@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"ak@...ux.intel.com" <ak@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH V5 2/3] perf tools: parse the pmu event prefix and surfix
> SNIP
>
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
> > +static int
> > +comp_pmu(const void *p1, const void *p2) {
> > + struct perf_pmu_event_symbol *pmu1 =
> > + (struct perf_pmu_event_symbol *) p1;
> > + struct perf_pmu_event_symbol *pmu2 =
> > + (struct perf_pmu_event_symbol *) p2;
> > +
> > + return strcmp(pmu1->symbol, pmu2->symbol); }
> > +
> > +/*
> > + * Read the pmu events list from sysfs
> > + * Save it into perf_pmu_events_list
> > + */
> > +static void perf_pmu__parse_init(void) {
> > +
> > + struct perf_pmu *pmu = NULL;
> > + struct perf_pmu_alias *alias;
> > + int len = 0;
> > +
>
> missing my previous comment being addressed:
>
I just found it in Junk E-mail. I have no idea why. :(
> ---
> Why do we need to call scan here? Looks like:
> pmu = pmu_lookup("cpu")
>
> should be enough.. and could be used below as well
> ---
>
Could we use "perf_pmu__find" here?
pmu_lookup is a static function.
Also, it looks we don't need to lookup all the time if the PMU is loaded.
Thanks,
Kan
> or commented why not to do it..
>
> 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists