From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1764190AbcISIAK (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Mon, 19 Sep 2016 04:00:10 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:59148 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S1760007AbcISIAD (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Mon, 19 Sep 2016 04:00:03 -0400
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2016 09:59:54 +0200
From: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>
To: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/7] perf hist: Introduce hists__link_hierarchy()
Message-ID: <20160919075954.GB26906@krava>
References: <20160913074552.13284-1-namhyung@kernel.org>
 <20160913074552.13284-3-namhyung@kernel.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20160913074552.13284-3-namhyung@kernel.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.7.0 (2016-08-17)
X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.28]); Mon, 19 Sep 2016 07:59:57 +0000 (UTC)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 04:45:47PM +0900, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> The hists__link_hierarchy() is to support hierarchy report with event
> group.  When it matches leader event and other members (with the
> hists__match_hierarchy), it also needs to link unmatched member entries
> with a dummy leader event so that it can show up in the output.

SNIP

>  
> +static int hists__link_hierarchy(struct hists *leader_hists,
> +				 struct hist_entry *parent,
> +				 struct rb_root *leader_root,
> +				 struct rb_root *other_root)
> +{
> +	struct rb_node *nd;
> +	struct hist_entry *pos, *leader;
> +
> +	for (nd = rb_first(other_root); nd; nd = rb_next(nd)) {
> +		pos = rb_entry(nd, struct hist_entry, rb_node_in);
> +
> +		if (hist_entry__has_pairs(pos)) {
> +			bool found = false;
> +
> +			list_for_each_entry(leader, &pos->pairs.head, pairs.node) {
> +				if (leader->hists == leader_hists) {
> +					found = true;
> +					break;
> +				}
> +			}
> +			if (!found)
> +				return -1;
> +		} else {
> +			leader = add_dummy_hierarchy_entry(leader_hists,
> +							   leader_root, pos);

could we call hists__add_dummy_entry in here? seems like there's only
difference in function arguments.. we could safe one function ;-)

thanks,
jirka