Hi Namhyung,
On Fri, 2017-07-21 at 12:31 +0900, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 05:49:20PM -0500, Tom Zanussi wrote:
> > Add the necessary infrastructure to allow the variables defined on one
> > event to be referenced in another. This allows variables set by a
> > previous event to be referenced and used in expressions combining the
> > variable values saved by that previous event and the event fields of
> > the current event. For example, here's how a latency can be
> > calculated and saved into yet another variable named 'wakeup_lat':
> >
> > # echo 'hist:keys=pid,prio:ts0=common_timestamp ...
> > # echo 'hist:keys=next_pid:wakeup_lat=common_timestamp-$ts0 ...
> >
> > In the first event, the event's timetamp is saved into the variable
> > ts0. In the next line, ts0 is subtracted from the second event's
> > timestamp to produce the latency.
> >
> > Further users of variable references will be described in subsequent
> > patches, such as for instance how the 'wakeup_lat' variable above can
> > be displayed in a latency histogram.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Tom Zanussi <[email protected]>
> > ---
>
> I think it'd be better spliting this into 3 parts: add hist_elt_data,
> pass tracing_map_elt to hist field func and add var ref logic.
>
Yeah, that makes sense, will do.
>
> [SNIP]
> > @@ -241,6 +270,324 @@ static u64 hist_field_timestamp(struct hist_field
> > *hist_field, void *event,
> > return ts;
> > }
> >
> > +static LIST_HEAD(hist_var_list);
> > +
> > +struct hist_var_data {
> > + struct list_head list;
> > + struct hist_trigger_data *hist_data;
> > +};
>
> Hmm.. I'm confused whether this list maintains reference of variable
> or defintion (or both?). It seems an entry is added only by
> save_hist_vars() which is for definition. But find_any_var_ref()
> looks it up for references.. What am I missing?
>
Nothing - it should be both, but as you point out it's missing the
reference-only triggers. Most of the time when you create a hist
trigger that references a variable, you also create a variable to
receive the result and use it later, which is why you don't normally
see a problem. Thanks for noticing this..
Tom
