From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Milian Wolff Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 11/16] perf report: properly handle branch count in match_chain Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2017 10:27:41 +0200 Message-ID: <9374748.RpdCs5g2ed@agathebauer> References: <20171009203310.17362-1-milian.wolff@kdab.com> <20171013140834.GO3503@kernel.org> <5f4372e7-8e75-bf34-3947-4b38036241a4@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Return-path: Received: from mail.kdab.com ([176.9.126.58]:60420 "EHLO mail.kdab.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751196AbdJPI1p (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Oct 2017 04:27:45 -0400 In-Reply-To: <5f4372e7-8e75-bf34-3947-4b38036241a4@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Sender: linux-perf-users-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: ravi Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Jiri Olsa , Jin Yao , Linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , David Ahern , Namhyung Kim , Peter Zijlstra On Montag, 16. Oktober 2017 06:18:17 CEST ravi wrote: > On Friday 13 October 2017 07:38 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > > Em Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 10:39:03AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu: > >> Em Mon, Oct 09, 2017 at 10:33:05PM +0200, Milian Wolff escreveu: > >>> Some of the code paths I introduced before returned too early > >>> without running the code to handle a node's branch count. > >>> By refactoring match_chain to only have one exit point, this > >>> can be remedied. > >> > >> Fixing up this one now. > > > > Millian, this is all fresher in your mind, can you please take a look at > > my perf/core branch and check if the change i made to ]PATCH v5 09/16] > > "perf report: compare symbol name for inlined frames when matching" is > > ok wrt Ravi's fix and then, please, rebase v5 on top of what is there? > > > > Ravi, please take a look at this as well, to see if with these changes > > your fix remains valid, ok? > > Yes Arnaldo, my changes are still valid. > > Milian, Can you please change this patch such that it incorporates dso > comparison for CCKEY_FUNCTION. Arnaldo has already done that. > ( Also, will that be good to change macro to CCKEY_FUNCTION_DOS ?) Personally, I don't think so. The DSO compare is, imo, just an implementation detail. Cheers -- Milian Wolff | milian.wolff@kdab.com | Senior Software Engineer KDAB (Deutschland) GmbH&Co KG, a KDAB Group company Tel: +49-30-521325470 KDAB - The Qt Experts