Messages in this thread |  | | From | Ian Rogers <> | Date | Wed, 15 Jul 2020 15:14:37 -0700 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 13/18] perf metric: Add events for the current group |
| |
On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 2:19 PM Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 10:00:09AM -0700, Ian Rogers wrote: > > On Sun, Jul 12, 2020 at 6:27 AM Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org> wrote: > > > > > > There's no need to iterate the whole list of groups, > > > when adding new events. The currently created group > > > is the one we want to add. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org> > > > --- > > > tools/perf/util/metricgroup.c | 22 ++++++++++++---------- > > > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/tools/perf/util/metricgroup.c b/tools/perf/util/metricgroup.c > > > index 8cbcc5e05fef..66f25362702d 100644 > > > --- a/tools/perf/util/metricgroup.c > > > +++ b/tools/perf/util/metricgroup.c > > > @@ -811,17 +811,19 @@ static int metricgroup__add_metric(const char *metric, bool metric_no_group, > > > > Could we add a function comment to describe the arguments here? > > ok > > > Currently events is an empty list out argument that is built up by > > this code, now it will be incrementally updated. Except I don't think > > I'm capturing the current state correctly, it is confusing that there > > is the loop in the current code. It looks like events will be added > > multiple times redundantly. > > oops, I meant to add the example of broken processing in here, > but forgot.. will update > > > > > > if (ret) > > > return ret; > > > > > > - list_for_each_entry(eg, group_list, nd) { > > > - if (events->len > 0) > > > - strbuf_addf(events, ","); > > > + if (events->len > 0) > > > + strbuf_addf(events, ","); > > > > > > - if (eg->has_constraint) { > > > - metricgroup__add_metric_non_group(events, > > > - &eg->pctx); > > > - } else { > > > - metricgroup__add_metric_weak_group(events, > > > - &eg->pctx); > > > - } > > > + /* > > > + * Even if we add multiple groups through the runtime > > > + * param, they share same events. > > > + */ > > > > I'm not clear what runtime param is here. Is it the \? arch runtime parameter? > > yes, that's that ppc quirk.. adding extra same metrics based > on that runtime param.. for some reason ;-)
Do they share the same event? I thought the "?" was substituted in a loop for a value 0...arch_runtime_value and so you got an event for each of those values.
Thanks, Ian
> thanks, > jirka >
|  |