Re: [PATCH v8 09/13] perf stat: implement control commands handling

[Alexey Budankov <alexey.budankov@linux.intel.com>]

On 25.06.2020 15:12, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 04:39:11PM +0300, Alexey Budankov wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 23.06.2020 17:54, Jiri Olsa wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 11:41:30AM +0300, Alexey Budankov wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Implement handling of 'enable' and 'disable' control commands
>>>> coming from control file descriptor. process_evlist() function
>>>> checks for events on control fds and makes required operations.
>>>> If poll event splits initiated timeout interval then the reminder
>>>> is calculated and still waited in the following poll() syscall.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Alexey Budankov <alexey.budankov@linux.intel.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>  tools/perf/builtin-stat.c | 67 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
>>>>  1 file changed, 50 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/tools/perf/builtin-stat.c b/tools/perf/builtin-stat.c
>>>> index f88d5ee55022..cc56d71a3ed5 100644
>>>> --- a/tools/perf/builtin-stat.c
>>>> +++ b/tools/perf/builtin-stat.c
>>>> @@ -492,6 +492,31 @@ static bool process_timeout(int timeout, unsigned int interval, int *times)
>>>>  	return print_interval(interval, times);
>>>>  }
>>>>  
>>>> +static bool process_evlist(struct evlist *evlist, unsigned int interval, int *times)
>>>> +{
>>>> +	bool stop = false;
>>>> +	enum evlist_ctl_cmd cmd = EVLIST_CTL_CMD_UNSUPPORTED;
>>>> +
>>>> +	if (evlist__ctlfd_process(evlist, &cmd) > 0) {
>>>> +		switch (cmd) {
>>>> +		case EVLIST_CTL_CMD_ENABLE:
>>>> +			pr_info(EVLIST_ENABLED_MSG);
>>>> +			stop = print_interval(interval, times);
>>>
>>> why is interval printed in here?
>>>
>>>> +			break;
>>>> +		case EVLIST_CTL_CMD_DISABLE:
>>>> +			stop = print_interval(interval, times);
>>>
>>> and here?
>>>
>>> it should be called from the main loop when the interval time is elapsed no?
>>
>> It is called from the main loop too and it is also additionally called here
>> to provide indication and counter values on commands processing times.
> 
> so it prints interval out of order?

Looks like it does. The only issue with it I see is change in times value.

~Alexey

> 
> jirka
>