[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20191021140439.GE32718@krava>
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2019 16:04:39 +0200
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 3/5] perf report: Sort by sampled cycles percent per
block for stdio
On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 02:56:57PM +0800, Jin, Yao wrote:
SNIP
> > > Does it seem like what the c2c does?
> >
> > well c2c has its own data output with multiline column titles,
> > hence it has its own separate dimension stuff, but your code
> > output is within the standard perf report right? single column
> > output.. why couldn't you use just sort_entry ?
> >
> > jirka
> >
>
> Hi Jiri,
>
> I've being thinking how to use sort_entry but I have some troubles.
>
> In v2, I used "struct perf_hpp_fmt" to pass extra argument. For example,
>
> static int64_t block_cycles_cov_sort(struct perf_hpp_fmt *fmt,
> struct hist_entry *left,
> struct hist_entry *right)
> {
> struct block_fmt *block_fmt = container_of(fmt, ...);
> struct report *rep = block_fmt->rep;
> ...
> }
>
> But if I just use sort_entry, I can't pass extra argument (it's not a good
> idea to add more fields in struct hist_entry).
>
> int64_t sort__xxx_sort(struct hist_entry *left,
> struct hist_entry *right)
>
> And for entry print it's similar, I can't pass extra argument in.
>
> In v2,
> static int block_cycles_pct_entry(struct perf_hpp_fmt *fmt,
> struct perf_hpp *hpp,
> struct hist_entry *he)
> {
> struct block_fmt *block_fmt = container_of(fmt,...);
> struct report *rep = block_fmt->rep;
> ...
> }
>
> But for se_snprintf, I can't pass extra argument in.
>
> hist_entry__xxx_snprintf(struct hist_entry *he, char *bf,
> size_t size, unsigned int width)
>
> That's why I feel headache for just using the sort_entry. :(
you might be right, I just want to omit another field output framework ;-)
I'm checking on this and will let you know if I find some way
jirka
Powered by blists - more mailing lists