Em Sun, Jun 14, 2015 at 10:19:23AM +0200, Jiri Olsa escreveu:
> Propagate evlist's cpu_map object through all the evsel objects,
> while keeping already configured evsel->cpus.
> 
> It'll be handy to access evsel's cpus directly
> in following patches.
> 
> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/n/tip-myadl53clbkjvzeqolwp9...@git.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa <jo...@kernel.org>
> ---
>  tools/perf/util/evlist.c | 24 +++++++++++++++++++++++-
>  1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/evlist.c b/tools/perf/util/evlist.c
> index f7d80ca58136..c0d3058c1868 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/util/evlist.c
> +++ b/tools/perf/util/evlist.c
> @@ -1085,6 +1085,28 @@ int perf_evlist__mmap(struct perf_evlist *evlist, 
> unsigned int pages,
>       return perf_evlist__mmap_ex(evlist, pages, overwrite, 0, false);
>  }
>  
> +static int propagate_maps(struct perf_evlist *evlist, struct target *target)

Please rename this to perf_evlist__set_maps()

> +{
> +     struct perf_evsel *evsel;

> +     evlist__for_each(evlist, evsel) {
> +             /*
> +              * We already have cpus for evsel (via PMU sysfs) so

                   If we already...

> +              * keep it, if there's no target cpu list defined.
                          ^ The comma here confused me
> +              */
> +             if (evsel->cpus && target->cpu_list)
> +                     cpu_map__put(evsel->cpus);

If you drop the reference, and then will test it... use a
cpu_map__zput(&evsel->cpus), so that after the put you don't access
something you don't hold a reference for anymore...

But the logic is still confusing! Can you try to rewrite it in a more
clear way? 

> +             if (!evsel->cpus || target->cpu_list)
> +                     evsel->cpus = cpu_map__get(evlist->cpus);

Something like:

                if (evsel->cpus) {
                        something
                } else {
                        something else
                }
> +
> +             if (!evsel->cpus)
> +                     return -ENOMEM;

Where was that we tried to allocate memory in this operation?

> +     }
> +
> +     return 0;
> +}
> +
>  int perf_evlist__create_maps(struct perf_evlist *evlist, struct target 
> *target)
>  {
>       evlist->threads = thread_map__new_str(target->pid, target->tid,
> @@ -1101,7 +1123,7 @@ int perf_evlist__create_maps(struct perf_evlist 
> *evlist, struct target *target)
>       if (evlist->cpus == NULL)
>               goto out_delete_threads;
>  
> -     return 0;
> +     return propagate_maps(evlist, target);
>  
>  out_delete_threads:
>       thread_map__put(evlist->threads);
> -- 
> 1.9.3
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Reply via email to