[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190227092755.GA22793@krava>
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2019 10:27:55 +0100
From: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
To: Jin Yao <yao.jin@...ux.intel.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 v2 1/3] perf diff: Support --time filter option
On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 08:11:07PM +0800, Jin Yao wrote:
SNIP
> + abstime_tmp = abstime_ostr;
>
> data__for_each_file(i, d) {
> - d->session = perf_session__new(&d->data, false, &tool);
> + d->session = perf_session__new(&d->data, false, &pdiff.tool);
> if (!d->session) {
> pr_err("Failed to open %s\n", d->data.path);
> ret = -1;
> goto out_delete;
> }
>
> + if (abstime_ostr) {
> + ret = parse_absolute_time(d, &abstime_tmp);
> + if (ret < 0)
> + goto out_delete;
> + } else if (pdiff.time_str) {
> + ret = parse_percent_time(d);
> + if (ret < 0)
> + goto out_delete;
> + } else {
> + pdiff.range_num = 1;
hum, why are we setting range_num to 1 again?
it's really hard to parse this code, maybe
it'd be better in separate loop/function
that would setup just timestamps..
thanks,
jirka
Powered by blists - more mailing lists