[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230318151208.61d73823@rorschach.local.home>
Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2023 15:12:08 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
mhiramat@...nel.org, zanussi@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] tracing/hist: simplify contains_operator()
On Thu, 2 Mar 2023 17:17:54 +0000
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com> wrote:
FYI, we follow Linus's preference that subjects start with a capital
letter. Unless of course you are a socialist and dislike capitalism?
tracing/hist: Simplify contains_operator()
> In a subsequent patch we'll add additional operators for histogram
> expressions.
Refrain from using "subsequent patch", instead say:
Simplify contains_operator() in order to support additional operators
for histogram expressions.
>
> In preparation for adding additional operators, this patch refactors
> contains_operator() to consider each operator within a precedence group
> independently by using the 'sep' pointer as the current rightmost
> operator, and removing the separate op pointers.
>
> Within each precedence group, this allows operators to be checked
> independently with a consistent pattern:
>
> op = strrchr(str, $OP_CHAR);
> if (op > *sep) {
> *sep = op;
> field_op = $FIELD_OP_TYPE;
> }
>
> This makes it easy to add new operators of the same precedence without
> needing to check multiple pointers, and without needing a final switch
> statement to recover the relevant pointer.
>
> There should be no functional change as a result of this patch.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
> Cc: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
> Cc: Steven Rostedt (Google) <rostedt@...dmis.org>
> Cc: Tom Zanussi <zanussi@...nel.org>
> Cc: linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org
> ---
> kernel/trace/trace_events_hist.c | 80 ++++++++++++--------------------
> 1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 50 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_events_hist.c b/kernel/trace/trace_events_hist.c
> index 10d36f751fcd..a308da2cde2f 100644
> --- a/kernel/trace/trace_events_hist.c
> +++ b/kernel/trace/trace_events_hist.c
> @@ -1813,13 +1813,15 @@ static char *expr_str(struct hist_field *field, unsigned int level)
> static int contains_operator(char *str, char **sep)
> {
> enum field_op_id field_op = FIELD_OP_NONE;
> - char *minus_op, *plus_op, *div_op, *mult_op;
> + char *op;
>
> + *sep = NULL;
Hmm!
>
> /*
> - * Report the last occurrence of the operators first, so that the
> - * expression is evaluated left to right. This is important since
> - * subtraction and division are not associative.
> + * For operators of the same precedence report the last occurrence of
> + * the operators first, so that the expression is evaluated left to
> + * right. This is important since subtraction and division are not
> + * associative.
> *
> * e.g
> * 64/8/4/2 is 1, i.e 64/8/4/2 = ((64/8)/4)/2
> @@ -1830,68 +1832,46 @@ static int contains_operator(char *str, char **sep)
> * First, find lower precedence addition and subtraction
> * since the expression will be evaluated recursively.
> */
> - minus_op = strrchr(str, '-');
> - if (minus_op) {
> + op = strrchr(str, '-');
> + if (op > *sep) {
Why compare to *sep if it is always NULL?
Oh! But later in the code we have:
if (contains_operator(field, NULL) || is_var_ref(field))
I wonder how *sep = NULL will handle that?
-- Steve
> + *sep = op;
> +
> /*
> * Unary minus is not supported in sub-expressions. If
> * present, it is always the next root operator.
> */
> - if (minus_op == str) {
> - field_op = FIELD_OP_UNARY_MINUS;
> - goto out;
> - }
> + if (op == str)
> + return FIELD_OP_UNARY_MINUS;
>
> field_op = FIELD_OP_MINUS;
> }
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists