From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [192.198.163.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 70F503242A4; Fri, 14 Aug 2026 03:16:43 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.11 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1786677405; cv=none; b=UzWNpFTk4x74hAerS6rWCscO8uwqfK9sUj5ljw1ep32GhaKd2RY8oPZvjadNacUg0qKtrSy5dBeW3ZGqkcxwu/rMv5LVpLsV4jD4iq/XlB+2KkmxDsVQuJfqlmRjaauWCI95wNwGwUS+PgJrDgrkkqe7slVzYyGWkWpTnvroZXc= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1786677405; c=relaxed/simple; bh=hmYj+8AmopKf1DpWYruOdx63McR8Lh6q13g8UYQZXFY=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version; b=dY/i4G5v2SICpdzzUdIO8GIGKnEnf1AORoXCLJek63SfD7gk917oXfQb6qGJk7kKl//UDwR+5w3h/M7J+Y1IuSUeXmfd9uAqST5USKm65A/igFqERCkEl0d7SbwmhfXKsfCe3UEPZxY0pNArJuoDsFfQNm3AqwAJFg+MmWu1Y7c= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=CTPEv9bs; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.11 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="CTPEv9bs" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1786677403; x=1818213403; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to: references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=hmYj+8AmopKf1DpWYruOdx63McR8Lh6q13g8UYQZXFY=; b=CTPEv9bsBhMBo2gnD5wpbRdDK4L7xq7axel6UQGaRh5uxKxH0zAMXqmR auxOfrDZ+t4QAB9EH4ccKJCpC3ClNHzLSo8vI+LE022mJvZiuEl3ifw4K bkVIiEt2l/EhtZCIMPLO0m7GhOVZBZwGL0iu7NKGqPncM8njhKps8QoL+ b0pBSSrcU8D91MnduSwS8zynqH4UTDTGnnWB/I2LdsuD0X5pvCuttXZDA knrwS11plCPkXq82gTWcT7LZutFor5Vz7InYXD7ZrXYvpLqAMLa9KtLWe 08H7H7L5MbPAKFDUZYrwnWl2YuGqNix9XFpgtl4Sdna7etGXqS8dve9Sl A==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: GZeCieK+QCqxRGG3R97TRw== X-CSE-MsgGUID: fg7xeKheQ+KBO92OxrCiOQ== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6800,10657,11874"; a="97849999" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.25,222,1779174000"; d="scan'208";a="97849999" Received: from orviesa010.jf.intel.com ([10.64.159.150]) by fmvoesa105.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 13 Aug 2026 20:16:42 -0700 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: rNtn8v+LTlSdF9YMvu9Hsw== X-CSE-MsgGUID: zeuepTLfSxSPwtJ0C00dzw== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.25,222,1779174000"; d="scan'208";a="262790344" Received: from linux-pnp-gnr-1.sh.intel.com ([10.239.83.186]) by orviesa010.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 13 Aug 2026 20:16:39 -0700 From: Jiebin Sun To: namhyung@kernel.org Cc: acme@kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com, peterz@infradead.org, adrian.hunter@intel.com, alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com, irogers@google.com, james.clark@linaro.org, jolsa@kernel.org, mark.rutland@arm.com, dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com, thomas.falcon@intel.com, tianyou.li@intel.com, wangyang.guo@intel.com, linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jiebin Sun Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 2/9] perf c2c: add function view browser skeleton Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2026 11:23:04 +0800 Message-ID: <20260814032306.2055624-1-jiebin.sun@intel.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.52.0 In-Reply-To: References: <20260810052647.588867-1-jiebin.sun@intel.com> <20260810052647.588867-3-jiebin.sun@intel.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hi Namhyung, > Considering function view in stdio, wouldn't it be better to move the > common code to util/c2c.c instead? Good point. Since this series only adds the TUI function view and has no stdio caller yet, I would prefer to defer the split until stdio support is implemented, when the shared interface is clearer. Would that be acceptable? If you prefer the separation in this series, I can move the common model to a separate util/c2c-function.c and keep the TUI code in ui/browsers/c2c-function.c. Thanks, Jiebin