Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 18 Apr 2016 16:29:15 +0200 | From | Jiri Olsa <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v4 1/6] perf tools: Derive trigger class from auxtrace_snapshot |
| |
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 10:20:23PM +0800, Wangnan (F) wrote: > > > On 2016/4/18 21:45, Jiri Olsa wrote: > >On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 06:32:08AM +0000, Wang Nan wrote: > >>Use 'trigger' to model operations which need to be executed when > >>an event (a signal, for example) is observed. > >> > >>States and transits: > >> > >> OFF--(on)--> READY --(toggle)--> TOGGLED --(process)--> PROCESSING > >> ^ | | > >> | | | > >> | (ready) (ready) > >> | | | > >> \__________________/______________________/ > >> > >>is_toggled and is_ready are two key functions to query the state of > >>a trigger. is_toggled means the event already happen; is_ready means the > >>trigger is waiting for the event. > >> > >>'PROCESSING' represents a state the event happens and be observed, and > >>the processing is on the way so can't accept a new event immediately. > >hum, I must be missing something.. but I dont see how you're > >using this state except for smal window within: > > > > if (auxtrace_snapshot_is_toggled()) { > > -> auxtrace_snapshot_process(); > > if (!auxtrace_snapshot_is_error()) > > -> record__read_auxtrace_snapshot(rec); > > > >but no other place queries or depends on this state > > Right. > > Since we are creating a new class, I think we can make code simpler by > merging > all state variables into trigger. > > Without this state we must keep 'auxtrace_record__snapshot_started'.
do we? we dont need this for switch_output code apparently
jirka
> > I think merging it into trigger class makes the whole program a little > bit simpler. Or do you think keeping trigger class simpler whould be better? > > Thank you. > >
| |