Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] perf diff: Support --time filter option

Jiri Olsa
2019-02-27T13:10:51Z

On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 08:51:44PM +0800, Jin, Yao wrote:
>
>
> On 2/27/2019 5:28 PM, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 08:11:07PM +0800, Jin Yao wrote:
> >
> > SNIP
> >
> > > + .ordered_events = true,
> > > + .ordering_requires_timestamps = true,
> > > + },
> > > };
> > > static struct perf_evsel *evsel_match(struct perf_evsel *evsel,
> > > @@ -771,19 +788,136 @@ static void data__free(struct data__file *d)
> > > }
> > > }
> > > +static int parse_time_range(struct data__file *d,
> > > + struct perf_time_interval *ptime_range,
> > > + const char *time_str)
> > > +{
> > > + if (perf_time__parse_str(ptime_range,
> > > + time_str) != 0) {
> > > + if (d->session->evlist->first_sample_time == 0 &&
> > > + d->session->evlist->last_sample_time == 0) {
> > > + pr_err("HINT: no first/last sample time found in perf data.\n"
> > > + "Please use latest perf binary to execute 'perf record'\n"
> > > + "(if '--buildid-all' is enabled, please set '--timestamp-boundary').\n");
> > > + return -EINVAL;
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + pdiff.range_num = perf_time__percent_parse_str(
> > > + ptime_range, pdiff.range_size, time_str,
> > > + d->session->evlist->first_sample_time,
> > > + d->session->evlist->last_sample_time);
> > > +
> > > + if (pdiff.range_num < 0) {
> > > + pr_err("Invalid time string\n");
> > > + return -EINVAL;
> > > + }
> > > + } else {
> > > + pdiff.range_num = 1;
> >
> > I dont understand why we set range_num to 1 if there's
> > not time option set.. it should be 0 and we should take
> > no action in diff__process_sample_event, right?
> >
> > then I checked the report code and we do the same,
> > could we fix that? I'm assuming we don't need any
> > time check if the time option is not set.. please
> > correct me if I miss something
> >
> > jirka
> >
>
> We support multiple complicated time strings. :(
>
> In parse_time_range(), perf_time__parse_str() returns 0 if the time string
> is a simple start/stop format. So next, we set the range_num to 1. If the
> time string contains multiple time percent ranges (e.g. "10%/1,10%/2,..."),
> perf_time__parse_str() will return with error (<0), then we will continue
> checking with perf_time__percent_parse_str().
>
> So when range_num is set to 1, it just means it's the simple time string.

why do we need to have time range set if there's no --time
option set by user?

jirka