From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alexey Budankov Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2]: perf util: map data buffer for preserving collected data Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2018 12:19:06 +0300 Message-ID: <48431c29-5642-c282-a760-c2dd99db8049@linux.intel.com> References: <20180827083303.GD24695@krava> <2284a8e8-d90e-bd99-89c1-0b125ba2e205@linux.intel.com> <20180828084522.GD23727@krava> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20180828084522.GD23727@krava> Content-Language: en-US Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Jiri Olsa Cc: Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Alexander Shishkin , Namhyung Kim , Andi Kleen , linux-kernel , linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-perf-users.vger.kernel.org Hi, On 28.08.2018 11:45, Jiri Olsa wrote: > On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 12:02:35PM +0300, Alexey Budankov wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 27.08.2018 11:33, Jiri Olsa wrote: >>> On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 07:42:09PM +0300, Alexey Budankov wrote: >>> >>> SNIP >>> >>>> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/mmap.c b/tools/perf/util/mmap.c >>>> index fc832676a798..e71d46cb01cc 100644 >>>> --- a/tools/perf/util/mmap.c >>>> +++ b/tools/perf/util/mmap.c >>>> @@ -155,6 +155,10 @@ void __weak auxtrace_mmap_params__set_idx(struct auxtrace_mmap_params *mp __mayb >>>> >>>> void perf_mmap__munmap(struct perf_mmap *map) >>>> { >>>> + if (map->data != NULL) { >>>> + munmap(map->data, perf_mmap__mmap_len(map)); >>>> + map->data = NULL; >>>> + } >>>> if (map->base != NULL) { >>>> munmap(map->base, perf_mmap__mmap_len(map)); >>>> map->base = NULL; >>>> @@ -190,6 +194,14 @@ int perf_mmap__mmap(struct perf_mmap *map, struct mmap_params *mp, int fd) >>>> map->base = NULL; >>>> return -1; >>>> } >>>> + map->data = mmap(NULL, perf_mmap__mmap_len(map), PROT_READ | PROT_WRITE, >>>> + MAP_PRIVATE | MAP_ANONYMOUS, -1, 0); >>> >>> hum, why does map->data need to be mmap-ed? >> >> The same way as for kernel buffers. If you see better alternatives it could be applied. > > I meant why not just allocate them with mmaloc? Yep. Using malloc()/free() makes the implementation shorter. Included into [PATCH v4 1/2]. > > jirka >