From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754314Ab2LDO5u (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Dec 2012 09:57:50 -0500 Received: from mail-pb0-f46.google.com ([209.85.160.46]:47456 "EHLO mail-pb0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751945Ab2LDO5t (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Dec 2012 09:57:49 -0500 From: Namhyung Kim To: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo Cc: Peter Zijlstra , Paul Mackerras , Ingo Molnar , LKML , Namhyung Kim , Jiri Olsa , Stephane Eranian Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] perf hists: Exchange order of comparing items when collapsing hists References: <1354596265-9901-1-git-send-email-namhyung@kernel.org> <1354596265-9901-2-git-send-email-namhyung@kernel.org> <20121204134405.GA3159@ghostprotocols.net> Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2012 23:57:41 +0900 In-Reply-To: <20121204134405.GA3159@ghostprotocols.net> (Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo's message of "Tue, 4 Dec 2012 10:44:05 -0300") Message-ID: <87fw3lc1ay.fsf@kernel.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 4 Dec 2012 10:44:05 -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > Em Tue, Dec 04, 2012 at 01:44:23PM +0900, Namhyung Kim escreveu: >> From: Namhyung Kim >> >> When comparing entries for collapsing put the given entry first, and >> then the iterated entry. This is not the case of hist_entry__cmp() >> when called if given sort keys don't require collapsing. So change >> the order for the sake of consistency. It will be required for >> matching and/or linking multiple hist entries. >> >> Cc: Jiri Olsa >> Cc: Stephane Eranian >> Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim >> --- >> tools/perf/util/hist.c | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/hist.c b/tools/perf/util/hist.c >> index 82df1b26f0d4..161c35e7ed0e 100644 >> --- a/tools/perf/util/hist.c >> +++ b/tools/perf/util/hist.c >> @@ -433,7 +433,7 @@ static bool hists__collapse_insert_entry(struct hists *hists __maybe_unused, >> parent = *p; >> iter = rb_entry(parent, struct hist_entry, rb_node_in); >> >> - cmp = hist_entry__collapse(iter, he); >> + cmp = hist_entry__collapse(he, iter); >> >> if (!cmp) { >> he_stat__add_stat(&iter->stat, &he->stat); > > What about this he_stat__add_stat call? Now the hist_entry__collapse > receives (he, iter) while this right next function call receives (iter, > he). Hmm.. I thought they're diffent kind of operation. hist_entry__collapse is in a process of iteration and he_stat__add_stat is not. It's just adding or copying entry's stat, so I thought it's something like memcpy - hence the order. If you really concern about ordering between them, maybe I can change hist_entry__cmp() to receive (iter, he). Thanks, Namhyung