From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2EB413515D7; Fri, 14 Aug 2026 06:14:01 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1786688043; cv=none; b=etFfGYvX08CcGV+zBxUJ7PnNSJI3d4bsz1ErCDB1rRK1rcw5vFYB9P77mm2z2hgxaOOKTsrpBSRrh+SDD9lAc8IuD0S0qX117lutrXptW8nSZeF4YefPc2YQTtcoMgLmND20TaucRSDN9Fy+bSGUZmBs9N7ldmpl9P/HkNUOCyQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1786688043; c=relaxed/simple; bh=UHvDfU78EGvPf6BP7gER1fA0Nlcr0aoeJOUgFfnBG0o=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=De0YxQWO6LKV1euJXt0RmEx4+uNMXLRXscRCw/9SVKyoOjOnRefzwbalcsXaGELRNLSkdJBmZHqs9Qo4eGRlX42fHYhF1vhzt4KVk06GDQc+St5N/+rqpLvi8bntvNhs8Gd/8T7DYWmhOPbD3ZDyavSq9WhxMTXiJ6JJHvRdXUU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=N3QfsRuS; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="N3QfsRuS" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3B0381F000E9; Fri, 14 Aug 2026 06:13:59 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1786688041; bh=xsdZrWjRwM+MlLLn49Nz99arDPFtsOPDOEn2X5ZMzEI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=N3QfsRuSWenrEdVWZkv0SxGSC2Btr/uuFUk2ptQvu0KZOCQhBarUnx1bcXI8XHMPS iwoSTM9uxga6ZPZ5EdyNOuQnAjC+1lwQLvVmfbg+17elPtYiG9sohKiFlHiYW/f/iU 1kI4wt2rccEQ9TxLyDZZ01u87+9WmZ0uQxuXhtzRGbBAD0wAHK/uB89qzI1OqqNhSD 0wkjn4ZrjttUTKK/JYMIii1Agwl0RHNIvL40n6JM47n9byeshR4PCSnMZ5E8vnbPtW uGuGDEmWgiz7zEqUOS8vyGSsrwOn5E8h9IXkzA7PQWfCttovfBT1GYq1RSWmkNKwCv ktZLtuLV2KJOQ== Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2026 15:13:57 +0900 From: Namhyung Kim To: Jiebin Sun Cc: acme@kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org, adrian.hunter@intel.com, alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com, irogers@google.com, james.clark@linaro.org, jolsa@kernel.org, mark.rutland@arm.com, dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com, thomas.falcon@intel.com, tianyou.li@intel.com, wangyang.guo@intel.com, linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 2/9] perf c2c: add function view browser skeleton Message-ID: References: <20260810052647.588867-1-jiebin.sun@intel.com> <20260810052647.588867-3-jiebin.sun@intel.com> <20260814032306.2055624-1-jiebin.sun@intel.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20260814032306.2055624-1-jiebin.sun@intel.com> On Fri, Aug 14, 2026 at 11:23:04AM +0800, Jiebin Sun wrote: > Hi Namhyung, > > > Considering function view in stdio, wouldn't it be better to move the > > common code to util/c2c.c instead? > > Good point. Since this series only adds the TUI function view and has no > stdio caller yet, I would prefer to defer the split until stdio support is > implemented, when the shared interface is clearer. My concern is that the later split would move the code as is and just make the history complex unnecessarily. > > Would that be acceptable? If you prefer the separation in this series, I > can move the common model to a separate util/c2c-function.c and keep the > TUI code in ui/browsers/c2c-function.c. Let's start with things very clearly separated. It's up to you but I prefer having obviously common code in the common location. Thanks, Namhyung