On Mon, Mar 07, 2016 at 09:59:34PM +0900, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 06, 2016 at 07:43:25PM +0100, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 04, 2016 at 11:59:36PM +0900, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> >
> > SNIP
> >
> > >
> > > @@ -2133,8 +2134,19 @@ static void hists__delete_all_entries(struct hists
> > > *hists)
> > > static void hists_evsel__exit(struct perf_evsel *evsel)
> > > {
> > > struct hists *hists = evsel__hists(evsel);
> > > + struct perf_hpp_fmt *fmt, *pos;
> > > + struct perf_hpp_list_node *node;
> > >
> > > hists__delete_all_entries(hists);
> > > +
> > > + list_for_each_entry(node, &hists->hpp_formats, list) {
> > > + perf_hpp_list__for_each_format_safe(&node->hpp, fmt, pos) {
> > > + list_del(&fmt->list);
> > > + free(fmt);
> > > + }
> > > + list_del(&node->list);
> > > + free(node);
> > > + }
> > > }
> > >
> > > static int hists_evsel__init(struct perf_evsel *evsel)
> > > diff --git a/tools/perf/util/hist.h b/tools/perf/util/hist.h
> > > index f4ef513527ba..3cab9dc20822 100644
> > > --- a/tools/perf/util/hist.h
> > > +++ b/tools/perf/util/hist.h
> > > @@ -78,6 +78,7 @@ struct hists {
> > > u16 col_len[HISTC_NR_COLS];
> > > int socket_filter;
> > > struct perf_hpp_list *hpp_list;
> > > + struct list_head hpp_formats;
> >
> > I've been thinking.. should hpp_formats and hpp_list be merged? something
> > like:
> >
> > struct perf_hpp_list {
> > struct list_head nodes;
> > int levels;
> > }
> >
> > sturct perf_hpp_list_node {
> > int level;
> > struct list_head fields;
> > struct list_head sorts;
> > int nr_sort_keys;
> > };
> >
> > it seems wrong to me that your hierarchy code and current one
> > got in separate paths.. we could have the new hierarchy support
> > struct above being used in current non-hierarchy code just
> > by using single level
> >
> > I haven't thought all this through.. just an idea ;-)
>
> Yes, I also think that we need to converge on the same data structure
> eventually. But I think it's too intrusive to be merged at once.
> Also keeping up with the latest perf changes is a PITA. ;-)
heh, amen ;-)
>
> So I decided to use it on the hierarchy first, and get tested in the
> wild for some time. After that we can convert the non-hierarchy code
> to use same path and data structure gradually IMHO.
ok, let's keep it in mind at least..
thanks.
jirka
