From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.0 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED, USER_AGENT_GIT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12315C282D8 for ; Wed, 30 Jan 2019 14:24:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2A2D20855 for ; Wed, 30 Jan 2019 14:24:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1731181AbfA3OYw (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Jan 2019 09:24:52 -0500 Received: from mga04.intel.com ([192.55.52.120]:27023 "EHLO mga04.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725803AbfA3OYt (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Jan 2019 09:24:49 -0500 X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga004.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.38]) by fmsmga104.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 30 Jan 2019 06:24:49 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.56,540,1539673200"; d="scan'208";a="271154281" Received: from otc-lr-04.jf.intel.com ([10.54.39.129]) by orsmga004.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 30 Jan 2019 06:24:49 -0800 From: kan.liang@linux.intel.com To: peterz@infradead.org, acme@kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: eranian@google.com, jolsa@redhat.com, namhyung@kernel.org, ak@linux.intel.com, Kan Liang Subject: [PATCH V3 05/13] perf mem: Factor out a function to generate sort order Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2019 06:23:46 -0800 Message-Id: <1548858234-8872-5-git-send-email-kan.liang@linux.intel.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.7.4 In-Reply-To: <1548858234-8872-1-git-send-email-kan.liang@linux.intel.com> References: <1548858234-8872-1-git-send-email-kan.liang@linux.intel.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Kan Liang Now, "--phys-data" is the only option which impacts the sort order. A simple "if else" is enough to handle the option. But there will be more options added, e.g. "--data-page-size", which also impact the sort order. The code will become too complex to be maintained. Divide the sort order string into several small pieces. The first piece is always the default sort string for LOAD/STORE. Appends the specific sort string if related option is applied. No functional change. Signed-off-by: Kan Liang --- Changes since V2: - Split into patch 5 and 6. - Fix the sort order inconsistent issue. tools/perf/builtin-mem.c | 41 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------- 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) diff --git a/tools/perf/builtin-mem.c b/tools/perf/builtin-mem.c index 57393e9..0647bd7 100644 --- a/tools/perf/builtin-mem.c +++ b/tools/perf/builtin-mem.c @@ -273,11 +273,35 @@ static int report_raw_events(struct perf_mem *mem) perf_session__delete(session); return ret; } +static char *get_sort_order(struct perf_mem *mem) +{ + bool has_extra_options = mem->phys_addr ? true : false; + char sort[128]; + + /* + * there is no weight (cost) associated with stores, so don't print + * the column + */ + if (!(mem->operation & MEM_OPERATION_LOAD)) { + strcpy(sort, "--sort=mem,sym,dso,symbol_daddr," + "dso_daddr,tlb,locked"); + } else if (has_extra_options) { + strcpy(sort, "--sort=local_weight,mem,sym,dso,symbol_daddr," + "dso_daddr,snoop,tlb,locked"); + } else + return NULL; + + if (mem->phys_addr) + strcat(sort, ",phys_daddr"); + + return strdup(sort); +} static int report_events(int argc, const char **argv, struct perf_mem *mem) { const char **rep_argv; int ret, i = 0, j, rep_argc; + char *new_sort_order; if (mem->dump_raw) return report_raw_events(mem); @@ -291,20 +315,9 @@ static int report_events(int argc, const char **argv, struct perf_mem *mem) rep_argv[i++] = "--mem-mode"; rep_argv[i++] = "-n"; /* display number of samples */ - /* - * there is no weight (cost) associated with stores, so don't print - * the column - */ - if (!(mem->operation & MEM_OPERATION_LOAD)) { - if (mem->phys_addr) - rep_argv[i++] = "--sort=mem,sym,dso,symbol_daddr," - "dso_daddr,tlb,locked,phys_daddr"; - else - rep_argv[i++] = "--sort=mem,sym,dso,symbol_daddr," - "dso_daddr,tlb,locked"; - } else if (mem->phys_addr) - rep_argv[i++] = "--sort=local_weight,mem,sym,dso,symbol_daddr," - "dso_daddr,snoop,tlb,locked,phys_daddr"; + new_sort_order = get_sort_order(mem); + if (new_sort_order) + rep_argv[i++] = new_sort_order; for (j = 1; j < argc; j++, i++) rep_argv[i] = argv[j]; -- 2.7.4