Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 20 May 2011 05:18:55 +0200 | From | Robert Richter <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2] perf, x86: Fix event scheduler for constraints with overlapping counters |
| |
On 19.05.11 14:06:50, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote: > > > On Wed, 2011-05-18 at 23:20 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > * Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > if (c->weight != w) > > > > > continue; > > > > > > > > > > - for_each_set_bit(j, c->idxmsk, X86_PMC_IDX_MAX) { > > > > > - if (!test_bit(j, used_mask)) > > > > > + /* for each bit in idxmsk starting from idx */ > > > > > + while (idx < X86_PMC_IDX_MAX) { > > > > > + idx = find_next_bit(c->idxmsk, X86_PMC_IDX_MAX, > > > > > + idx); > > > > > > > > I'd be mighty tempted to ignore that 80 column rule here ;-) > > > > > > Please put the body of the loop into a helper function, the function is large > > > and there are countless col80 uglinesses in it! > > > > I just tried that, its real ugly due to the amount of state you need to > > pass around. > > Does it help if you put that state into a helper structure?
Yes, this is what I have in mind too. We could iterate on such a state stucture instead of a couple of single variables. Storing and restoring the state will then just copying the structure.
-Robert
> > Thanks, > > Ingo >
-- Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. Operating System Research Center
| |