From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753550AbaHLHdh (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Aug 2014 03:33:37 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:17040 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751981AbaHLHdg (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Aug 2014 03:33:36 -0400 Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2014 09:33:20 +0200 From: Jiri Olsa To: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo Cc: Jiri Olsa , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Adrian Hunter , Corey Ashford , David Ahern , Frederic Weisbecker , Ingo Molnar , Jean Pihet , Namhyung Kim , Paul Mackerras , Peter Zijlstra Subject: Re: [RFC 00/20] perf: Finish sampling commands when events are closed Message-ID: <20140812073319.GB1128@krava.brq.redhat.com> References: <1407747014-18394-1-git-send-email-jolsa@kernel.org> <20140811201249.GA4148@kernel.org> <20140811202812.GB4148@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140811202812.GB4148@kernel.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 05:28:12PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > Em Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 05:12:49PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu: > > Em Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 10:49:54AM +0200, Jiri Olsa escreveu: > > > hi, > > > adding support to quit sampling commands: > > > record,top,trace,kvm stat live > > > > > > when all the monitored events are closed, like following perf > > > command will now exit when monitored process (pid 1234) exits: > > > > > > $ perf record -p 1234 > > > > > > I added independent poller object to handle basic polling > > > tasks. I had to factor some parts, so sending this as RFC, > > > > Why? I'm trying to figure out why this poller class is needed, just from > > reading the changelog entries, no luck so far. > > So this is all about accounting for when all events are closed? I.e. as > we receive the ERR and HUP we go on closing the entries in the pollfd? > Then, when none are closed, then we exit, is that the case? > > Why not just mark them -1 and decrement evlist->nr_open_fds (new field)? > > struct pollfds { > struct pollfd *pollfds; > int nr_fds; > int nr_open_fds; > }; > > Don't use callbacks and then that poller_item doesn't need to exist :-\ I think callbacks are convenient when having different kind of events combined in polling, as described in my reply to your first email > > I'll try to cook a patch with those ideas later today, if for anything, > to validate your patches :-) ok ;-) thanks jirka