linux-kernel - [PATCH V3 3/9] perf mem: Factor out a function to generate sort order

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20201216185805.9981-4-kan.liang@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Wed, 16 Dec 2020 10:57:59 -0800
From:   kan.liang@...ux.intel.com
To:     acme@...nel.org, mingo@...nel.org, jolsa@...hat.com
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, namhyung@...nel.org,
        eranian@...gle.com, ak@...ux.intel.com, mark.rutland@....com,
        will@...nel.org, mpe@...erman.id.au,
        Kan Liang <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: [PATCH V3 3/9] perf mem: Factor out a function to generate sort order

From: Kan Liang <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>

Now, "--phys-data" is the only option which impacts the sort order.
A simple "if else" is enough to handle the option. But there will be
more options added, e.g. "--data-page-size", which also impact the sort
order. The code will become too complex to be maintained.

Divide the sort order string into several small pieces.
The first piece is always the default sort string for LOAD/STORE.
Appends the specific sort string if related option is applied.

No functional change.

Acked-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
Acked-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
Signed-off-by: Kan Liang <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>
---
 tools/perf/builtin-mem.c | 41 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------
 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)

diff --git a/tools/perf/builtin-mem.c b/tools/perf/builtin-mem.c
index fdfbff7592f4..823742036ddb 100644
--- a/tools/perf/builtin-mem.c
+++ b/tools/perf/builtin-mem.c
@@ -298,11 +298,35 @@ static int report_raw_events(struct perf_mem *mem)
 	perf_session__delete(session);
 	return ret;
 }
+static char *get_sort_order(struct perf_mem *mem)
+{
+	bool has_extra_options = mem->phys_addr ? true : false;
+	char sort[128];
+
+	/*
+	 * there is no weight (cost) associated with stores, so don't print
+	 * the column
+	 */
+	if (!(mem->operation & MEM_OPERATION_LOAD)) {
+		strcpy(sort, "--sort=mem,sym,dso,symbol_daddr,"
+			     "dso_daddr,tlb,locked");
+	} else if (has_extra_options) {
+		strcpy(sort, "--sort=local_weight,mem,sym,dso,symbol_daddr,"
+			     "dso_daddr,snoop,tlb,locked");
+	} else
+		return NULL;
+
+	if (mem->phys_addr)
+		strcat(sort, ",phys_daddr");
+
+	return strdup(sort);
+}
 
 static int report_events(int argc, const char **argv, struct perf_mem *mem)
 {
 	const char **rep_argv;
 	int ret, i = 0, j, rep_argc;
+	char *new_sort_order;
 
 	if (mem->dump_raw)
 		return report_raw_events(mem);
@@ -316,20 +340,9 @@ static int report_events(int argc, const char **argv, struct perf_mem *mem)
 	rep_argv[i++] = "--mem-mode";
 	rep_argv[i++] = "-n"; /* display number of samples */
 
-	/*
-	 * there is no weight (cost) associated with stores, so don't print
-	 * the column
-	 */
-	if (!(mem->operation & MEM_OPERATION_LOAD)) {
-		if (mem->phys_addr)
-			rep_argv[i++] = "--sort=mem,sym,dso,symbol_daddr,"
-					"dso_daddr,tlb,locked,phys_daddr";
-		else
-			rep_argv[i++] = "--sort=mem,sym,dso,symbol_daddr,"
-					"dso_daddr,tlb,locked";
-	} else if (mem->phys_addr)
-		rep_argv[i++] = "--sort=local_weight,mem,sym,dso,symbol_daddr,"
-				"dso_daddr,snoop,tlb,locked,phys_daddr";
+	new_sort_order = get_sort_order(mem);
+	if (new_sort_order)
+		rep_argv[i++] = new_sort_order;
 
 	for (j = 1; j < argc; j++, i++)
 		rep_argv[i] = argv[j];
-- 
2.17.1