lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2016]   [Aug]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH V5 9/9] coresight: etm-perf: incorporating sink definition from cmd line
Date
Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org> writes:

> +enum {
> + ETM_TOKEN_SINK_CPU,
> + ETM_TOKEN_SINK,
> + ETM_TOKEN_ERR,
> +};
> +
> +static const match_table_t drv_cfg_tokens = {
> + {ETM_TOKEN_SINK_CPU, "sink=cpu%d:%s"},
> + {ETM_TOKEN_SINK, "sink=%s"},
> + {ETM_TOKEN_ERR, NULL},
> +};

Wait, but we just parsed away the '=' and the whole thing is now a
linked list of { key, value }?

This also answers my question from the other email about the use cases
for sending in ascii strings. In my opinion, all this is completely
unnecessary.

> +static int
> +etm_set_drv_configs(struct perf_event *event,
> + struct list_head *drv_configs)
> +{
> + char *config, *sink;
> + int len;
> + struct perf_drv_config *drv_config;
> + void *old_sink;
> +
> + list_for_each_entry(drv_config, drv_configs, entry) {
> + /* ETM HW configuration needs a sink specification */
> + if (!drv_config->option)
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + len = strlen(drv_config->config) + strlen("=") +
> + strlen(drv_config->option) + 1;
> +
> + config = kmalloc(len, GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!config)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> + /* Reconstruct user configuration */
> + snprintf(config, len, "%s=%s",
> + drv_config->config, drv_config->option);

Wait, what? We parse this *twice*?

There's basically a malloc+snprintf[which could have been
kasprintf()]+match_token just to see if drv_config::option starts with a
'cpu%d:'?

Regards,
--
Alex

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2016-09-17 09:57    [W:0.099 / U:0.100 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site