[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8050280.N0YfCng2Hd@agathebauer>
Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2017 15:16:37 +0200
From: Milian Wolff <milian.wolff@...b.com>
To: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>
Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] perf ui progress: Make sure we always define step value
On Freitag, 8. September 2017 14:05:07 CEST Jiri Olsa wrote:
> Unlikely, but we could have ui_progress__init being called
> with total < 16, which would set the next and step variables
> to 0. That would force unnecessary ui_progress__ops->update
> calls because 'next' would never raise.
>
> Forcing the next and step values to be always > 0.
>
> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/n/tip-0zcvhmsmbhkfgoi7c670rq2x@git.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>
> ---
> tools/perf/ui/progress.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/perf/ui/progress.c b/tools/perf/ui/progress.c
> index a0f24c7115c5..a9c15804b1f6 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/ui/progress.c
> +++ b/tools/perf/ui/progress.c
> @@ -25,7 +25,7 @@ void ui_progress__update(struct ui_progress *p, u64 adv)
> void ui_progress__init(struct ui_progress *p, u64 total, const char *title)
> {
> p->curr = 0;
> - p->next = p->step = total / 16;
> + p->next = p->step = total / 16 ?: 1;
> p->total = total;
> p->title = title;
This is a GNU extension, does this compile with clang?
Cheers
--
Milian Wolff | milian.wolff@...b.com | Senior Software Engineer
KDAB (Deutschland) GmbH&Co KG, a KDAB Group company
Tel: +49-30-521325470
KDAB - The Qt Experts
Powered by blists - more mailing lists