From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753477AbbIHGpN (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Sep 2015 02:45:13 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:34851 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751464AbbIHGpL (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Sep 2015 02:45:11 -0400 Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2015 08:45:08 +0200 From: Jiri Olsa To: Adrian Hunter Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , mingo@kernel.org, kan.liang@intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 07/14] perf tools: Add evsel->own_cpus Message-ID: <20150908064508.GA20530@krava.brq.redhat.com> References: <1441636076-31390-1-git-send-email-adrian.hunter@intel.com> <1441636076-31390-8-git-send-email-adrian.hunter@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1441636076-31390-8-git-send-email-adrian.hunter@intel.com> 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, Sep 07, 2015 at 05:27:49PM +0300, Adrian Hunter wrote: > perf_evlist__propagate_maps() cannot easily tell if an evsel > has its own cpu map. To make that simpler, keep a copy of > the PMU cpu map and adjust the propagation logic accordingly. > > Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter > --- > tools/perf/util/evlist.c | 5 ++++- > tools/perf/util/evsel.c | 1 + > tools/perf/util/evsel.h | 1 + > tools/perf/util/parse-events.c | 4 ++-- > 4 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/tools/perf/util/evlist.c b/tools/perf/util/evlist.c > index c959c42080e3..6764e0eff849 100644 > --- a/tools/perf/util/evlist.c > +++ b/tools/perf/util/evlist.c > @@ -1111,9 +1111,12 @@ static void perf_evlist__propagate_maps(struct perf_evlist *evlist) > * We already have cpus for evsel (via PMU sysfs) so > * keep it, if there's no target cpu list defined. > */ > - if (!evsel->cpus || evlist->has_user_cpus) { > + if (!evsel->own_cpus || evlist->has_user_cpus) { > cpu_map__put(evsel->cpus); > evsel->cpus = cpu_map__get(evlist->cpus); > + } else if (evsel->cpus != evsel->own_cpus) { > + cpu_map__put(evsel->cpus); > + evsel->cpus = cpu_map__get(evsel->own_cpus); hum, so (evsel->cpus != evsel->own_cpus) could happen only when: - evsel->own_cpus != NULL - we overloaded evsel->cpus with evlist->cpus via perf_evlist__propagate_maps - we changed evlist->has_user_cpus = false - we recall perf_evlist__propagate_maps I'm missing usecase for that, or something else ;-) thanks, jirka