On 08/09/15 09:45, Jiri Olsa wrote: > On Mon, Sep 07, 2015 at 05:27:49PM +0300, Adrian Hunter wrote: >> perf_evlist__propagate_maps() cannot easily tell if an evsel >> has its own cpu map. To make that simpler, keep a copy of >> the PMU cpu map and adjust the propagation logic accordingly. >> >> Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <[email protected]> >> --- >> tools/perf/util/evlist.c | 5 ++++- >> tools/perf/util/evsel.c | 1 + >> tools/perf/util/evsel.h | 1 + >> tools/perf/util/parse-events.c | 4 ++-- >> 4 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/evlist.c b/tools/perf/util/evlist.c >> index c959c42080e3..6764e0eff849 100644 >> --- a/tools/perf/util/evlist.c >> +++ b/tools/perf/util/evlist.c >> @@ -1111,9 +1111,12 @@ static void perf_evlist__propagate_maps(struct >> perf_evlist *evlist) >> * We already have cpus for evsel (via PMU sysfs) so >> * keep it, if there's no target cpu list defined. >> */ >> - if (!evsel->cpus || evlist->has_user_cpus) { >> + if (!evsel->own_cpus || evlist->has_user_cpus) { >> cpu_map__put(evsel->cpus); >> evsel->cpus = cpu_map__get(evlist->cpus); >> + } else if (evsel->cpus != evsel->own_cpus) { >> + cpu_map__put(evsel->cpus); >> + evsel->cpus = cpu_map__get(evsel->own_cpus); > > hum, so (evsel->cpus != evsel->own_cpus) could happen only when: > - evsel->own_cpus != NULL > - we overloaded evsel->cpus with evlist->cpus via > perf_evlist__propagate_maps > - we changed evlist->has_user_cpus = false > - we recall perf_evlist__propagate_maps > > I'm missing usecase for that, or something else ;-)
That's true but the idea is to establish rules (invariants) that are always true. Like an evsel either has its own cpu map or the same as the evlist. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
