Re: [PATCH 5/8] perf mem: report physical addresses

[Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>]

On Wed, Jan 06, 2016 at 06:04:34AM -0500, kan.liang@intel.com wrote:
> From: Kan Liang <kan.liang@intel.com>
> 
> perf mem report should support physical addresses by applying -p or
> --phys-data. The default mem sort order for physical addresses is added
> accordingly.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Kan Liang <kan.liang@intel.com>
> ---
>  tools/perf/builtin-mem.c | 15 +++++++++++----
>  tools/perf/util/sort.c   |  1 +
>  tools/perf/util/sort.h   |  1 +
>  3 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/perf/builtin-mem.c b/tools/perf/builtin-mem.c
> index 7d5ff3a..a81bdc2 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/builtin-mem.c
> +++ b/tools/perf/builtin-mem.c
> @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
>  #include "util/tool.h"
>  #include "util/session.h"
>  #include "util/data.h"
> +#include "util/sort.h"
>  
>  #define MEM_OPERATION_LOAD	0x1
>  #define MEM_OPERATION_STORE	0x2
> @@ -176,9 +177,15 @@ static int report_events(int argc, const char **argv, struct perf_mem *mem)
>  	 * there is no weight (cost) associated with stores, so don't print
>  	 * the column
>  	 */
> -	if (!(mem->operation & MEM_OPERATION_LOAD))
> -		rep_argv[i++] = "--sort=mem,sym,dso,symbol_daddr,"
> -				"dso_daddr,tlb,locked";
> +	if (!(mem->operation & MEM_OPERATION_LOAD)) {
> +		if (mem->phys_addr)
> +			rep_argv[i++] = "--sort=mem,sym,dso,symbol_daddr,"
> +					"dso_daddr,tlb,locked,phys_daddr";
> +		else
> +			rep_argv[i++] = "--sort=mem,sym,dso,symbol_daddr,"
> +					"dso_daddr,tlb,locked";
> +	} else if (mem->phys_addr)
> +		rep_argv[i++] = default_phys_mem_sort_order;

should this have "--sort=" as prefix ?

thanks,
jirka