Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Date | Thu, 25 Jun 2020 14:17:19 +0200 | From | Jiri Olsa <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v8 04/13] perf stat: factor out body of event handling loop for system wide |
| |
On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 05:27:41PM +0300, Alexey Budankov wrote: > > On 23.06.2020 17:56, Jiri Olsa wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 11:37:43AM +0300, Alexey Budankov wrote: > >> > >> Introduce process_timeout() and process_interval() functions that > >> factor out body of event handling loop for attach and system wide > >> monitoring use cases. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Alexey Budankov <alexey.budankov@linux.intel.com> > >> --- > >> tools/perf/builtin-stat.c | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++-------- > >> 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/tools/perf/builtin-stat.c b/tools/perf/builtin-stat.c > >> index 9be020e0098a..31f7ccf9537b 100644 > >> --- a/tools/perf/builtin-stat.c > >> +++ b/tools/perf/builtin-stat.c > >> @@ -475,6 +475,23 @@ static void process_interval(void) > >> print_counters(&rs, 0, NULL); > >> } > >> > >> +static bool print_interval(unsigned int interval, int *times) > >> +{ > >> + if (interval) { > >> + process_interval(); > >> + if (interval_count && !(--(*times))) > >> + return true; > >> + } > >> + return false; > >> +} > >> + > >> +static bool process_timeout(int timeout, unsigned int interval, int *times) > >> +{ > >> + if (timeout) > >> + return true; > >> + return print_interval(interval, times); > >> +} > > > > I think it's confusing to keep this together, that > > process_timeout triggers also interval processing > > > > I think you can keep the timeout separated from interval > > processing and rename the print_interval to process_interval > > and process_interval to __process_interval > > Well, ok. > > I will rename process_interval() to __process_interval() and > then print_interval() to process_interval(). > > Regarding timeout let's have it like this: > > static bool process_timeout(int timeout) > { > return timeout ? true : false; > }
can't this just stay as value check after finished poll?
if (timeout) break;
and then separate call to process_interval(interval, times)?
jirka
> > static bool process_timing_settings(int timeout, unsigned int interval, int *times) > { > bool res = process_timeout(timeout); > if (!res) > res = process_interval(interval, times); > return res; > } > > Ok? > > ~Alexey > > > > > jirka > > > >> + > >> static void enable_counters(void) > >> { > >> if (stat_config.initial_delay) > >> @@ -611,6 +628,7 @@ static int __run_perf_stat(int argc, const char **argv, int run_idx) > >> struct affinity affinity; > >> int i, cpu; > >> bool second_pass = false; > >> + bool stop = false; > >> > >> if (interval) { > >> ts.tv_sec = interval / USEC_PER_MSEC; > >> @@ -805,17 +823,11 @@ static int __run_perf_stat(int argc, const char **argv, int run_idx) > >> psignal(WTERMSIG(status), argv[0]); > >> } else { > >> enable_counters(); > >> - while (!done) { > >> + while (!done && !stop) { > >> nanosleep(&ts, NULL); > >> if (!is_target_alive(&target, evsel_list->core.threads)) > >> break; > >> - if (timeout) > >> - break; > >> - if (interval) { > >> - process_interval(); > >> - if (interval_count && !(--times)) > >> - break; > >> - } > >> + stop = process_timeout(timeout, interval, ×); > >> } > >> } > >> > >> -- > >> 2.24.1 > >> > >> > > >
| |