[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <5f4372e7-8e75-bf34-3947-4b38036241a4@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2017 09:48:17 +0530
From: ravi <ravi.bangoria@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
Milian Wolff <milian.wolff@...b.com>
Cc: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>, Jin Yao <yao.jin@...ux.intel.com>,
Linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
ravi.bangoria@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 11/16] perf report: properly handle branch count in
match_chain
On Friday 13 October 2017 07:38 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> Em Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 10:39:03AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu:
>> Em Mon, Oct 09, 2017 at 10:33:05PM +0200, Milian Wolff escreveu:
>>> Some of the code paths I introduced before returned too early
>>> without running the code to handle a node's branch count.
>>> By refactoring match_chain to only have one exit point, this
>>> can be remedied.
>> Fixing up this one now.
> Millian, this is all fresher in your mind, can you please take a look at
> my perf/core branch and check if the change i made to ]PATCH v5 09/16]
> "perf report: compare symbol name for inlined frames when matching" is
> ok wrt Ravi's fix and then, please, rebase v5 on top of what is there?
>
> Ravi, please take a look at this as well, to see if with these changes
> your fix remains valid, ok?
Yes Arnaldo, my changes are still valid.
Milian, Can you please change this patch such that it incorporates dso
comparison for CCKEY_FUNCTION.
( Also, will that be good to change macro to CCKEY_FUNCTION_DOS ?)
Thanks,
Ravi
Powered by blists - more mailing lists