From: Sukadev Bhattiprolu <sukadev@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>
Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Fw: Re: [PATCH 1/1] powerpc/perf: Adjust callchain based on DWARF debug info
Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2014 08:39:11 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140604153910.GA16430@us.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140604120801.GE5555@krava.brq.redhat.com>
Jiri Olsa [jolsa@redhat.com] wrote:
| On Tue, Jun 03, 2014 at 12:47:10AM -0700, Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote:
|
| SNIP
|
| > |
| > |
| > | could you please change this, so it's nop for arch != powerpc
| > | via #ifdef I guess.. or some other smart way ;-)
| >
| > I was trying to avoid the #ifdef in the middle of the function.
| >
| > How about adding a PERF_CONTEXT_IGNORE and doing something like this:
|
| hum, 2 arch calls.. seems too complicated.. :-\
Other than an 'arch_' prefix in their name the non-powerpc functions
themselves are trivial, no ?
|
| so if you are already introducing PERF_CONTEXT_IGNORE, why
| dont we go with the chain duplication/fixing in arch code
| you mentioned before?
|
| this way the callchain loop stays simple and it's extendbable
| to future changes (I think u mentioned we could change more
| than one entry in future..?)
The memdup() on each call chain entry can impact performance for
powerpc. AFAICT, only one entry needs to be adjusted, so the memdup()
looked like an overkill.
|
| thoughts.. anyone? ;-)
|
| thanks,
| jirka
prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-06-04 15:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20140530155925.GF7427@krava.brq.redhat.com>
2014-06-02 14:12 ` Fw: Re: [PATCH 1/1] powerpc/perf: Adjust callchain based on DWARF debug info Jiri Olsa
2014-06-03 7:47 ` Sukadev Bhattiprolu
2014-06-04 12:08 ` Jiri Olsa
2014-06-04 15:39 ` Sukadev Bhattiprolu [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20140604153910.GA16430@us.ibm.com \
--to=sukadev@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=dsahern@gmail.com \
--cc=jolsa@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox