On 10/2/2017 10:21 PM, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 02, 2017 at 09:41:09PM +0800, Jin, Yao wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 10/2/2017 7:58 PM, Jiri Olsa wrote:
>>> On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 08:45:21PM +0800, Jin Yao wrote:
>>>
>>> SNIP
>>>
>>>> diff --git a/tools/perf/builtin-script.c b/tools/perf/builtin-script.c
>>>> index 9092de0..7fd3063 100644
>>>> --- a/tools/perf/builtin-script.c
>>>> +++ b/tools/perf/builtin-script.c
>>>> @@ -1357,6 +1357,8 @@ static void print_sample_synth(struct perf_sample
>>>> *sample,
>>>> }
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> +#define PTIME_RANGE_MAX 10
>>>> +
>>>> struct perf_script {
>>>> struct perf_tool tool;
>>>> struct perf_session *session;
>>>> @@ -1370,6 +1372,8 @@ struct perf_script {
>>>> int name_width;
>>>> const char *time_str;
>>>> struct perf_time_interval ptime;
>>>> + struct perf_time_interval ptime_range[PTIME_RANGE_MAX];
>>>> + int range_num;
>>>> };
>>>>
>>>> static int perf_evlist__max_name_len(struct perf_evlist *evlist)
>>>> @@ -1565,8 +1569,11 @@ static int process_sample_event(struct perf_tool
>>>> *tool,
>>>> struct perf_script *scr = container_of(tool, struct perf_script, tool);
>>>> struct addr_location al;
>>>>
>>>> - if (perf_time__skip_sample(&scr->ptime, sample->time))
>>>> + if (perf_time__skip_sample(&scr->ptime, sample->time) ||
>>>> + perf_time__ranges_skip_sample(scr->ptime_range, scr->range_num,
>>>> + sample->time)) {
>>>
>>> any reason for why dont use ptime_range[1] with range_num = 1
>>> and use just a single call here?
>>>
>>> jirka
>>>
>>
>> Just want the code to be easy reading.
>>
>> perf_time__range_skip_sample doesn't allow the invalid time range.
>>
>> But perf_time__skip_sample allows the time range to be invalid (ptime->start
>> or ptime->end can be 0).
>>
>> I don't want to mix them up because the code might be not clear.
>>
>> Are 2 calls OK here? If you think a single call is better, I will change.
>
> well, would be nice to have single call for this.. but not big deal for me ;-)
>
> jirka
>
I will make a single call for this.
Thanks
Jin Yao
