linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] perf report: Make --branch-history work without callgraphs(-g) option in perf record

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:   Fri, 5 May 2017 11:10:24 +0800
From:   "Jin, Yao" <yao.jin@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Milian Wolff <milian.wolff@...b.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
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf report: Make --branch-history work without
 callgraphs(-g) option in perf record

SNIP
>> -		if (symbol_conf.use_callchain) {
>> +		if (symbol_conf.use_callchain &&
>> +			!symbol_conf.show_branchflag_count) {
>>   			ui__error("Selected -g or --branch-history but no "
>>   				  "callchain data. Did\n"
>>   				  "you call 'perf record' without -g?\n");
> The `--branch-history` part of this error message is now stale, no?

Yes, the error message is obsolete. I will change it in next version.
>
>> @@ -397,7 +398,8 @@ static int perf_evlist__tty_browse_hists(struct
>> perf_evlist *evlist,
>>
>>   		hists__fprintf_nr_sample_events(hists, rep, evname, stdout);
>>   		hists__fprintf(hists, !quiet, 0, 0, rep->min_percent, stdout,
>> -			       symbol_conf.use_callchain);
>> +			       symbol_conf.use_callchain |
>> +			       symbol_conf.show_branchflag_count);
>>   		fprintf(stdout, "\n\n");
>>   	}
> Not sure about the coding style here, but shouldn't this be a boolean or
> operator here '||' - semantically? Functionality wise it will be the same, I
> guess?

Should be same. While I will follow your comments to change it to '||'.

I will wait other comments for some days and then send out the next version.

Thanks
Jin Yao