From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 946A3C4363A for ; Tue, 20 Oct 2020 17:10:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48FDB2222D for ; Tue, 20 Oct 2020 17:10:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2395230AbgJTRKg (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Oct 2020 13:10:36 -0400 Received: from mga09.intel.com ([134.134.136.24]:49918 "EHLO mga09.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2395212AbgJTRKc (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Oct 2020 13:10:32 -0400 IronPort-SDR: c6OX2zy3CSlayJTd4ftx2pIRRArsUiY2QECRsz7LU2FerkHPgUrqIjD70n3kOdB6kUY+AfaBxP PkcFg1QwIfLA== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6000,8403,9780"; a="167367324" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.77,398,1596524400"; d="scan'208";a="167367324" X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga003.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.27]) by orsmga102.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 20 Oct 2020 10:10:31 -0700 IronPort-SDR: MzWGBYn6nrIEJqhjGB+Ku9czOfC1wCGGa0MBnM9lArw+jY/E/6mgXOzfqzWPyKMcR0LAFUz1Pa Bq4+fvN1VMEA== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.77,398,1596524400"; d="scan'208";a="316094297" Received: from linux.intel.com ([10.54.29.200]) by orsmga003.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 20 Oct 2020 10:10:31 -0700 Received: from [10.249.231.55] (abudanko-mobl.ccr.corp.intel.com [10.249.231.55]) by linux.intel.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28C575804D6; Tue, 20 Oct 2020 10:10:28 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 02/15] perf report: output trace file name in raw trace dump From: Alexey Budankov To: Andi Kleen Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Jiri Olsa , Namhyung Kim , Alexander Shishkin , Adrian Hunter , Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar , linux-kernel References: <810f3a69-0004-9dff-a911-b7ff97220ae0@linux.intel.com> <87e2050b-37e6-8ed8-e1e0-cfa074b030fa@linux.intel.com> <20201012160144.GA466880@tassilo.jf.intel.com> <42d5395a-71f5-63e1-f7c9-fd76e2b8bee4@linux.intel.com> Organization: Intel Corp. Message-ID: <19dd0fa0-c236-6042-8ba6-48b4696e66bb@linux.intel.com> Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 20:10:27 +0300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.12.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 20.10.2020 19:31, Alexey Budankov wrote: > > On 12.10.2020 20:06, Alexey Budankov wrote: >> >> On 12.10.2020 19:01, Andi Kleen wrote: >>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2020 at 11:54:24AM +0300, Alexey Budankov wrote: >>>> @@ -180,7 +183,8 @@ static int ordered_events__deliver_event(struct ordered_events *oe, >>>> ordered_events); >>>> >>>> return perf_session__deliver_event(session, event->event, >>>> - session->tool, event->file_offset); >>>> + session->tool, event->file_offset, >>>> + event->file_path); >>> >>> Wouldn't it be better to pass "event" around now, which would contain at least >>> four of the arguments. >>> >>> These functions are getting entirely too many arguments. >> >> Well, either approach is possible, and even shrink of two arguments kept at session object. >> However changing function signature more than posted can cause bigger adjustments all over >> the code. So this needs more evaluation prior implementation. > > After brief evaluation it still doesn't look easy. The simplest thing > I could imagine is to probably combine file_path and file_offset at a > struct object on stack and then pass the object by the reference along > function calls. I expect it will roughly cause the same amount of changes > in the code and saves one argument (GP register). It is not that much > but still. However I don't see issues with passing even 6 args on stack. Sorry - "passing 6 args to a function call"