Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 25 Jan 2021 10:45:54 +0100 | From | Jiri Olsa <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v7] perf stat: Fix wrong skipping for per-die aggregation |
| |
On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 01:47:54PM +0800, Jin, Yao wrote: > Hi Jiri, > > On 1/24/2021 6:57 AM, Jiri Olsa wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 12:21:36PM +0800, Jin, Yao wrote: > > > > sNIP > > > > > mask = hashmap__new(pkg_id_hash, pkg_id_equal, NULL); > > > d = cpu_map__get_die(cpus, cpu, NULL).die; > > > key = (size_t)d << KEY_SHIFT | s; /* s is socket id */ > > > if (hashmap__find(mask, (void *)key, NULL)) > > > *skip = true; > > > else > > > ret = hashmap__add(mask, (void *)key, (void *)1); > > > > > > If we use 'unsigned long' to replace 'size_t', it reports the build error for 32 bits: > > > > > > stat.c:320:23: warning: passing argument 1 of ‘hashmap__new’ from > > > incompatible pointer type [-Wincompatible-pointer-types] > > > mask = hashmap__new(pkg_id_hash, pkg_id_equal, NULL); > > > ^~~~~~~~~~~ > > > In file included from stat.c:16: > > > hashmap.h:75:17: note: expected ‘hashmap_hash_fn’ {aka ‘unsigned int > > > (*)(const void *, void *)’} but argument is of type ‘long unsigned int > > > (*)(const void *, void *)’ > > > > > > If we use "unsigned int", it's not good for 64 bits. So I still use 'size_t' in this patch. > > > > > > Any comments for this idea (using conditional compilation)? > > > > isn't it simpler to allocate the key then? like below > > (just compile tested) > > > > jirka > > > > Hmm, Each method has advantages and disadvantages. > > My method uses conditional compilation but it looks a bit complicated. The > advantage is it doesn't need to allocate the memory for key. > > If you need me to post v8, I'd love to. > > Anyway, either method is fine for me. :)
I believe that the less ifdefs te better, if you could squash this change with your patch and send it, that'd be great
SNIP
> > + return *key & 0xffffffff; > > } > > -static bool pkg_id_equal(const void *key1, const void *key2, > > +static bool pkg_id_equal(const void *__key1, const void *__key2, > > void *ctx __maybe_unused) > > { > > - return (size_t)key1 == (size_t)key2; > > + uint64_t *key1 = (uint64_t*) __key1; > > + uint64_t *key2 = (uint64_t*) __key2; > > + > > + return *key1 == *key2; > > } > > static int check_per_pkg(struct evsel *counter, > > @@ -297,7 +309,7 @@ static int check_per_pkg(struct evsel *counter, > > struct hashmap *mask = counter->per_pkg_mask; > > struct perf_cpu_map *cpus = evsel__cpus(counter); > > int s, d, ret = 0; > > - size_t key; > > + uint64_t *key; > > *skip = false; > > @@ -338,7 +350,11 @@ static int check_per_pkg(struct evsel *counter, > > if (d < 0) > > return -1; > > - key = (size_t)d << 16 | s; > > + key = malloc(sizeof(*key)); > > + if (!key) > > + return -ENOMEM; > > + > > + *key = (size_t)d << 32 | s; > > Should be "*key = (uint64_t)d << 32 | s;"?
yes, I missed this bit
thanks, jirka
| |