Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 29 Nov 2012 15:52:57 -0300 | From | Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 07/18] perf hists: Exchange order of comparing items when collapsing hists |
| |
Em Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 03:38:35PM +0900, Namhyung Kim escreveu: > From: Namhyung Kim <namhyung.kim@lge.com> > > When comparing entries for collapsing put the given entry first, and > then the iterated entry. This is for the sake of consistency and will
consistency with what? and, see below:
> be required by the event group report. > > Cc: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com> > Cc: Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com> > Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org> > --- > tools/perf/util/hist.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/tools/perf/util/hist.c b/tools/perf/util/hist.c > index 82df1b26f0d4..161c35e7ed0e 100644 > --- a/tools/perf/util/hist.c > +++ b/tools/perf/util/hist.c > @@ -433,7 +433,7 @@ static bool hists__collapse_insert_entry(struct hists *hists __maybe_unused, > parent = *p; > iter = rb_entry(parent, struct hist_entry, rb_node_in); > > - cmp = hist_entry__collapse(iter, he); > + cmp = hist_entry__collapse(he, iter); > > if (!cmp) { > he_stat__add_stat(&iter->stat, &he->stat);
doesn't this now gets inconsistent with the hist_entry__collapse() call? I.e. iter first, he after, also there is the case for callchains, below, care to elaborate here?
> -- > 1.7.11.7
| |