From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754144Ab3K0LiP (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Nov 2013 06:38:15 -0500 Received: from cn.fujitsu.com ([222.73.24.84]:54956 "EHLO song.cn.fujitsu.com" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751821Ab3K0LiO (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Nov 2013 06:38:14 -0500 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.93,781,1378828800"; d="scan'208";a="9138233" Message-ID: <5296900F.8010209@cn.fujitsu.com> Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2013 19:36:31 -0500 From: Dongsheng Yang User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130612 Thunderbird/17.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Adrian Hunter CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dsahern@gmail.com, jolsa@redhat.com, namhyung@kernel.org, acme@ghostprotocols.net, mingo@redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf util: Join four conditions in two in perf_evlist__create_maps(). References: <1385590984-30244-1-git-send-email-yangds.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> <5295BEDA.5070002@intel.com> <529677A2.6040304@cn.fujitsu.com> <5295CE48.4090501@intel.com> In-Reply-To: <5295CE48.4090501@intel.com> X-MIMETrack: Itemize by SMTP Server on mailserver/fnst(Release 8.5.3|September 15, 2011) at 2013/11/27 19:38:15, Serialize by Router on mailserver/fnst(Release 8.5.3|September 15, 2011) at 2013/11/27 19:38:15, Serialize complete at 2013/11/27 19:38:15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 11/27/2013 05:49 AM, Adrian Hunter wrote: > On 28/11/13 00:52, Dongsheng Yang wrote: >> On 11/27/2013 04:43 AM, Adrian Hunter wrote: >>> On 28/11/13 00:23, Dongsheng Yang wrote: >>>> There are four condition branchs in perf_evlist__create_maps, but they >>>> only do two kinds of thing. 1st and 4th call cpu_map__new(), and the others >>>> call cpu_map__dummy_new(). This patch joins them in two branchs, decreasing >>>> the number of branch and removing some duplicated code. >>> That code has changed again. See: >>> >>> http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/acme/linux.git/log/?h=perf/core >>> >>> >> Hi Adrian! >> Thanx for your reminding. Yes, a more checking is added into the 1st >> branch. >> And I think we still can join them in two conditions. >> >> Do you think this idea is ok to you? If so, I will update my patch base on >> the latest code. > Personally I like code that is easy to read, and I don't think > combining the conditions does that. But you could set a bool > and use that to decide what to call. > How about add a function in target.c named perf_target__uses_dummy_map(), and this function take over the all checking to decide which to call. Then we can use it here like: if (perf_target__uses_dummy_map(target)): evlist->cpus = cpu_map__dummy_new(); else: evlist->cpus = cpu_map__new(target->cpu_list); >> Yang >>>> Signed-off-by: Dongsheng Yang >>>> --- >>>> tools/perf/util/evlist.c | 8 +++----- >>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/evlist.c b/tools/perf/util/evlist.c >>>> index bbc746a..2258eb4 100644 >>>> --- a/tools/perf/util/evlist.c >>>> +++ b/tools/perf/util/evlist.c >>>> @@ -819,11 +819,9 @@ int perf_evlist__create_maps(struct perf_evlist >>>> *evlist, struct target *target) >>>> if (evlist->threads == NULL) >>>> return -1; >>>> - if (target->force_per_cpu) >>>> - evlist->cpus = cpu_map__new(target->cpu_list); >>>> - else if (target__has_task(target)) >>>> - evlist->cpus = cpu_map__dummy_new(); >>>> - else if (!target__has_cpu(target) && !target->uses_mmap) >>>> + if (!target->force_per_cpu && >>>> + (target__has_task(target) || >>>> + (!target__has_cpu(target) && !target->uses_mmap))) >>>> evlist->cpus = cpu_map__dummy_new(); >>>> else >>>> evlist->cpus = cpu_map__new(target->cpu_list); >>>> >> >> > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ >