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 S1755046AbcGEMxo (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Tue, 5 Jul 2016 08:53:44 -0400
Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:52749 "EHLO foss.arm.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1751762AbcGEMwg (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 5 Jul 2016 08:52:36 -0400
Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2016 13:52:27 +0100
From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf: fix pmu::filter_match for SW-led groups
Message-ID: <20160705125226.GE20478@leverpostej>
References: <1465917041-15339-1-git-send-email-mark.rutland@arm.com>
 <20160702164025.GU30921@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20160704180534.GD9048@leverpostej>
 <20160705083526.GY30921@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20160705094447.GA20478@leverpostej>
 <20160705120426.GA30921@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20160705120426.GA30921@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Tue, Jul 05, 2016 at 02:04:26PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 05, 2016 at 10:44:48AM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > My bad; I assumed that for both PMUs we'd start at the root, and thus
> > would need to re-sort in order to get the current CPU's PMU ordered
> > first, much like currently with rotation.
> > 
> > I guess I'm having difficulty figuring out the structure of that tree.
> > If we can easily/cheaply find the relevant sub-tree then the above isn't
> > an issue.
> 
> struct event {
> 	struct rb_node node;
> 	int pmu_id;
> 	s64 lag;
> 	...
> };
> 
> bool event_less(struct rb_node *a, struct rb_node *b)
> {
> 	struct event *left = rb_entry(a, struct event, node);
> 	struct event *right = rb_entry(b, struct event, node);
> 
> 	if (a->pmu_id < b->pmu_id)
> 		return true;
> 
> 	if (b->pmu_id > a->pmu_id)
> 		return false;
> 
> 	/* a->pmu_id == b->pmu_id */
> 	if (a->lag < b->lag)
> 		return true;
> 
> 	return false;
> }
> 
> Will give you a tree with primary order @pmu_id and secondary order
> @lag.
> 
> Which you'd iterate like:
> 
> 	for (event = event_find(pmu_id); event->pmu_id == pmu_id; event = event_next(event)) {
> 	}
> 
> And get only the events matching @pmu_id in @lag order.

Cheers! Sorry for being thick; I think I understand now.

I'll have a tinker with the idea.

Thanks,
Mark.