lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Mar]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] perf tools: Fix ordering with unstable tsc
    Em Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 01:10:31AM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker escreveu:
    > On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 04:55:35PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
    > > Em Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 05:50:37PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker escreveu:
    > > > +static int alloc_cpus_timestamp_array(struct perf_session *s,
    > > > + if (sample->cpu < s->nr_cpus)

    > > Shouldn't we try to robustify this checking against HEADER_NRCPUS (if
    > > present)?

    > Yeah I thought about that too. I can try to make that working.
    > I just thought this was an optimization that I could later add (ie: first
    > try to see if the core idea of the patch is accepted).

    Right, I deferred that to tglx, but he must be busy as always :-P

    > Of course the real long term optimization is going to have one file per
    > CPU. There, the ordering will be much easier and deterministically
    > correct.

    Yeah.

    > > > + os->last_cpu_timestamp = realloc(os->last_cpu_timestamp,
    > > > + sizeof(u64) * nr_cpus);
    > > If realloc fails we return -ENOMEM, but leak the old buffer.

    > Doh! the common trap with realloc...

    :-)

    > > At some point we can have in the TUI/GUI a way for the user to ask for
    > > an specific perf.data file to be processed, if it fails to process due
    > > to the above realloc, we'll continue, allowing other perf.data files to
    > > be processed, but will have this leak.

    > Ok. Will fix.

    Thanks!

    - Arnaldo


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2012-03-22 16:31    [W:0.022 / U:89.700 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site