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 S1752133AbcFKBRW (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Fri, 10 Jun 2016 21:17:22 -0400
Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.136]:52580 "EHLO mail.kernel.org"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1750946AbcFKBRU (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 10 Jun 2016 21:17:20 -0400
Date: Sat, 11 Jun 2016 10:17:04 +0900
From: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>
To: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Hemant Kumar <hemant@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Brendan Gregg <brendan.d.gregg@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH perf/core v10 10/23] perf probe: Remove caches when
 --cache is given
Message-Id: <20160611101704.9f1c662f87ebdd68179e5ee6@kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <20160609142828.GQ11589@kernel.org>
References: <20160608092854.3116.29007.stgit@devbox>
	<20160608093040.3116.69426.stgit@devbox>
	<20160609142828.GQ11589@kernel.org>
X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.4.3 (GTK+ 2.24.28; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Thu, 9 Jun 2016 11:28:28 -0300
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org> wrote:

> > diff --git a/tools/perf/util/probe-file.c b/tools/perf/util/probe-file.c
> > index a6d4a67..f687607 100644
> > --- a/tools/perf/util/probe-file.c
> > +++ b/tools/perf/util/probe-file.c
> > @@ -660,19 +660,39 @@ out:
> >  	return ret;
> >  }
> >  
> > +static bool probe_cache_entry__compare(struct probe_cache_entry *entry,
> > +				       struct strfilter *filter)
> > +{
> > +	char buf[128], *ptr = entry->spev;
> > +
> > +	if (entry->pev.event) {
> > +		snprintf(buf, 128, "%s:%s", entry->pev.group, entry->pev.event);
> > +		ptr = buf;
> > +	}
> > +	return strfilter__compare(filter, ptr);
> > +}
> > +
> > +int probe_cache__remove_entries(struct probe_cache *pcache,
> > +				struct strfilter *filter)
> > +{
> > +	struct probe_cache_entry *entry, *tmp;
> > +
> > +	list_for_each_entry_safe(entry, tmp, &pcache->list, list) {
> 
> so here you used the preferred idiom, i.e. using
> list_for_each_entry_safe(), once you stop doing the list removal at the
> list entry destructor, it gets the good old boring usual idiom, please
> do that.

OK, I see.
> 
> Also please consider renaming perf_cache__remove_entries() to
> perf_cache__filter_purge(), as it doesn't simply remove entries, it
> purges them (that is, remove an entry and delete it), and only if the
> entry got filtered.

OK, such advice about naming helps me a lot :)

Thank you!


-- 
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>