Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 25 Jun 2020 14:14:53 +0200 | From | Jiri Olsa <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v8 09/13] perf stat: implement control commands handling |
| |
On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 05:10:10PM +0300, Alexey Budankov wrote: > > On 23.06.2020 17:54, Jiri Olsa wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 11:41:30AM +0300, Alexey Budankov wrote: > > > > SNIP > > > >> > >> while (1) { > >> if (forks) > >> @@ -581,8 +617,17 @@ static int dispatch_events(bool forks, int timeout, int interval, int *times, st > >> if (done || stop || child) > >> break; > >> > >> - nanosleep(ts, NULL); > >> - stop = process_timeout(timeout, interval, times); > >> + clock_gettime(CLOCK_MONOTONIC, &time_start); > >> + if (!(evlist__poll(evsel_list, time_to_sleep) > 0)) { /* poll timeout or EINTR */ > >> + stop = process_timeout(timeout, interval, times); > >> + time_to_sleep = sleep_time; > >> + } else { /* fd revent */ > >> + stop = process_evlist(evsel_list, interval, times); > >> + clock_gettime(CLOCK_MONOTONIC, &time_stop); > >> + diff_timespec(&time_diff, &time_stop, &time_start); > >> + time_to_sleep -= time_diff.tv_sec * MSEC_PER_SEC + > >> + time_diff.tv_nsec / NSEC_PER_MSEC; > > > > should we check time_to_sleep > time_diff first? > > Probably and if time_diff > time_to_sleep then time_to_sleep = 0 ?
or extra call to process_timeout? if we dont want to call evlist_poll with 0 timeout
jirka
> > ~Alexey > > > > > jirka > > >
| |