Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 1 Nov 2013 13:57:56 +0100 | From | Jiri Olsa <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 08/14] perf report: Cache cumulative callchains |
| |
On Fri, Nov 01, 2013 at 01:29:42PM +0100, Jiri Olsa wrote: > On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 03:56:10PM +0900, Namhyung Kim wrote: > > SNIP > > > * double accounting. > > @@ -501,8 +528,29 @@ iter_add_next_cumulative_entry(struct add_entry_iter *iter, > > { > > struct perf_evsel *evsel = iter->evsel; > > struct perf_sample *sample = iter->sample; > > + struct cumulative_cache *ccache = iter->priv; > > struct hist_entry *he; > > int err = 0; > > + int i; > > + > > + /* > > + * Check if there's duplicate entries in the callchain. > > + * It's possible that it has cycles or recursive calls. > > + */ > > + for (i = 0; i < iter->curr; i++) { > > + if (sort__has_sym) { > > + if (ccache[i].sym == al->sym) > > + return 0; > > + } else { > > + /* Not much we can do - just compare the dso. */ > > + if (ccache[i].dso == al->map->dso) > > + return 0; > > + } > > + } > > hum, do we want to prevent recursion totaly? > how about intended recursion?
ugh... just managed to read the whole patch, please forget above comment ;-)
> > also should the dso be checked together with sym? > because the symbol is defined like dso::sym > > jirka
| |