[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <cf901e1e-781f-4e1c-439f-26d09691e0fd@linux.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2018 15:19:56 +0300
From: Alexey Budankov <alexey.budankov@...ux.intel.com>
To: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 2/3]: perf record: enable asynchronous trace writing
Hi,
On 08.10.2018 13:51, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 08, 2018 at 09:17:11AM +0300, Alexey Budankov wrote:
>
> SNIP
>
>> struct option;
>> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/mmap.c b/tools/perf/util/mmap.c
>> index db8f16f8a363..ecaa5b5eb3ed 100644
>> --- a/tools/perf/util/mmap.c
>> +++ b/tools/perf/util/mmap.c
>> @@ -367,6 +367,82 @@ int perf_mmap__push(struct perf_mmap *md, void *to,
>> return rc;
>> }
>>
>> +#ifdef HAVE_AIO_SUPPORT
>> +int perf_mmap__aio_push(struct perf_mmap *md, void *to,
>> + int push(void *to, struct aiocb *cblock, void *buf, size_t size, off_t off),
>> + off_t *off)
>> +{
>
> seems like this could be defined static within builtin-record object,
> is there a reason why it's in here?
The reason is analogy with perf_mmap__push() above.
Thanks,
Alexey
>
> thanks,
> jirka
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists