[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20190604130017.31207-13-adrian.hunter@intel.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2019 16:00:10 +0300
From: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>
To: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
Cc: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>, Jin Yao <yao.jin@...ux.intel.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 12/19] perf time-utils: Treat time ranges consistently
Currently, options allow only 1 explicit (non-percentage) time range.
In preparation for adding support for multiple explicit time ranges,
treat time ranges consistently.
Instead of treating some time ranges as inclusive and some as excluding the
end time, treat all time ranges as inclusive. This is only a 1 nanosecond
change but is necessary to treat multiple explicit time ranges in a
consistent manner.
Note, there is a later patch that adds a test for time-utils.
Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>
---
tools/perf/util/time-utils.c | 7 +++----
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/perf/util/time-utils.c b/tools/perf/util/time-utils.c
index 20663a460df3..1d67cf1216c7 100644
--- a/tools/perf/util/time-utils.c
+++ b/tools/perf/util/time-utils.c
@@ -389,13 +389,12 @@ bool perf_time__ranges_skip_sample(struct perf_time_interval *ptime_buf,
ptime = &ptime_buf[i];
if (timestamp >= ptime->start &&
- ((timestamp < ptime->end && i < num - 1) ||
- (timestamp <= ptime->end && i == num - 1))) {
- break;
+ (timestamp <= ptime->end || !ptime->end)) {
+ return false;
}
}
- return (i == num) ? true : false;
+ return true;
}
int perf_time__parse_for_ranges(const char *time_str,
--
2.17.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists