Re: [PATCH 07/18] perf hists: Exchange order of comparing items when collapsing hists

[Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@ghostprotocols.net>]

Em Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 03:38:35PM +0900, Namhyung Kim escreveu:
> From: Namhyung Kim <namhyung.kim@lge.com>
> 
> When comparing entries for collapsing put the given entry first, and
> then the iterated entry.  This is for the sake of consistency and will

consistency with what? and, see below:

> be required by the event group report.
> 
> Cc: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>
> Cc: Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>
> Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
> ---
>  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);

doesn't this now gets inconsistent with the hist_entry__collapse() call?
I.e. iter first, he after, also there is the case for callchains, below,
care to elaborate here?

> -- 
> 1.7.11.7