[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <002d3bee-ae51-4a19-9eaa-8cdc63a97e86@intel.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2021 13:18:47 +0300
From: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>
To: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
Cc: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] perf script: Fix unnecessary machine_resolve()
On 10/08/21 9:25 pm, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> Em Tue, Aug 10, 2021 at 02:48:09PM +0300, Adrian Hunter escreveu:
>> machine_resolve() may have already been called. Test for that to avoid
>> calling it again unnecessarily.
>
> By some dlfilter function, right...
>
> Perhaps it would be better for machine__resolve() itself to check that?
>
> Probably we'll need a 'force' arg, or have __machine__resolve() that
> does exactly what machine__resolve() does today and then tools wanting
> to force it to avoid using whatever is 'cached'?
Yes, or perhaps introduce machine__resolve_once() and thread__resolve_once() ?
>
> - Arnaldo
>
>> Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>
>> ---
>> tools/perf/builtin-script.c | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/tools/perf/builtin-script.c b/tools/perf/builtin-script.c
>> index e2e165b53499..f469354155f1 100644
>> --- a/tools/perf/builtin-script.c
>> +++ b/tools/perf/builtin-script.c
>> @@ -2212,7 +2212,7 @@ static int process_sample_event(struct perf_tool *tool,
>> if (filter_cpu(sample))
>> goto out_put;
>>
>> - if (machine__resolve(machine, &al, sample) < 0) {
>> + if (!al.thread && machine__resolve(machine, &al, sample) < 0) {
>> pr_err("problem processing %d event, skipping it.\n",
>> event->header.type);
>> ret = -1;
>> --
>> 2.17.1
>>
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists