[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <b793b75e-0c55-a986-0a5e-a7aac269cae5@huawei.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2020 13:00:22 +0100
From: John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com>
To: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
CC: <peterz@...radead.org>, <mingo@...hat.com>, <acme@...nel.org>,
<mark.rutland@....com>, <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
<namhyung@...nel.org>, <will@...nel.org>, <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
<linuxarm@...wei.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<qiangqing.zhang@....com>, <irogers@...gle.com>,
<robin.murphy@....com>, <zhangshaokun@...ilicon.com>,
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 10/13] perf metricgroup: Split up
metricgroup__add_metric()
On 22/04/2020 12:44, Jiri Olsa wrote:
>> static int metricgroup__add_metric(const char *metric, struct strbuf *events,
>> struct list_head *group_list)
>> {
>> @@ -502,37 +542,12 @@ static int metricgroup__add_metric(const char *metric, struct strbuf *events,
>> break;
>> if (!pe->metric_expr)
>> continue;
>> - if (match_metric(pe->metric_group, metric) ||
>> - match_metric(pe->metric_name, metric)) {
>> - const char **ids;
>> - int idnum;
>> - struct egroup *eg;
>> -
>> - pr_debug("metric expr %s for %s\n", pe->metric_expr, pe->metric_name);
>>
>> - if (expr__find_other(pe->metric_expr,
>> - NULL, &ids, &idnum) < 0)
>> - continue;
>> - if (events->len > 0)
>> - strbuf_addf(events, ",");
>> -
>> - if (metricgroup__has_constraint(pe))
>> - metricgroup__add_metric_non_group(events, ids, idnum);
>> - else
>> - metricgroup__add_metric_weak_group(events, ids, idnum);
>> -
>> - eg = malloc(sizeof(struct egroup));
>> - if (!eg) {
>> - ret = -ENOMEM;
>> - break;
>> - }
>> - eg->ids = ids;
>> - eg->idnum = idnum;
>> - eg->metric_name = pe->metric_name;
>> - eg->metric_expr = pe->metric_expr;
>> - eg->metric_unit = pe->unit;
>> - list_add_tail(&eg->nd, group_list);
>> - ret = 0;
> also this place got changed just recently a lot,
> so you might want to rebase to the Arnaldo's latest perf/core
Hi jirka,
Yeah, I saw that. I can check.
TBH, apart from that, I would be welcome to opinion on this latter patch
of the series, concerned with metrics. I just split (butcher) the
function and call common parts from 2x places now. Maybe there's a more
fluid way to do this.
Cheers,
John
Powered by blists - more mailing lists