[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20191023113642.GN22919@krava>
Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2019 13:36:42 +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 v3 3/5] perf report: Sort by sampled cycles percent per
block for stdio
On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 04:07:08PM +0800, Jin Yao wrote:
SNIP
> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/sort.c b/tools/perf/util/sort.c
> index 43d1d410854a..eb286700a8a9 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/util/sort.c
> +++ b/tools/perf/util/sort.c
> @@ -492,6 +492,10 @@ struct sort_entry sort_sym_ipc_null = {
> .se_width_idx = HISTC_SYMBOL_IPC,
> };
>
> +struct sort_entry sort_block_cycles = {
> + .se_cmp = sort__sym_cmp,
> +};
so this is here only for you to be able to write '-s total_cycles'
and has no other functonality right?
I think we'd be better with report boolean option instad, like
'perf report --total-cycles', because your code does the column
display by itself.. and we could get rid of this -s confusion
jirka
Powered by blists - more mailing lists