Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v8 09/13] perf stat: implement control commands handling | From | Alexey Budankov <> | Date | Thu, 25 Jun 2020 17:58:06 +0300 |
| |
On 25.06.2020 15:14, Jiri Olsa wrote: > On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 05:10:10PM +0300, Alexey Budankov wrote: >> >> On 23.06.2020 17:54, Jiri Olsa wrote: >>> On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 11:41:30AM +0300, Alexey Budankov wrote: >>> >>> SNIP >>> >>>> >>>> while (1) { >>>> if (forks) >>>> @@ -581,8 +617,17 @@ static int dispatch_events(bool forks, int timeout, int interval, int *times, st >>>> if (done || stop || child) >>>> break; >>>> >>>> - nanosleep(ts, NULL); >>>> - stop = process_timeout(timeout, interval, times); >>>> + clock_gettime(CLOCK_MONOTONIC, &time_start); >>>> + if (!(evlist__poll(evsel_list, time_to_sleep) > 0)) { /* poll timeout or EINTR */ >>>> + stop = process_timeout(timeout, interval, times); >>>> + time_to_sleep = sleep_time; >>>> + } else { /* fd revent */ >>>> + stop = process_evlist(evsel_list, interval, times); >>>> + clock_gettime(CLOCK_MONOTONIC, &time_stop); >>>> + diff_timespec(&time_diff, &time_stop, &time_start); >>>> + time_to_sleep -= time_diff.tv_sec * MSEC_PER_SEC + >>>> + time_diff.tv_nsec / NSEC_PER_MSEC; >>> >>> should we check time_to_sleep > time_diff first? >> >> Probably and if time_diff > time_to_sleep then time_to_sleep = 0 ? > > or extra call to process_timeout? if we dont want to call evlist_poll > with 0 timeout
poll() man page says it is ok to call poll with 0 timeout so process_timeout() and initialization of time_to_sleep will be done in common flow.
~Alexey
| |