Re: [PATCH 2/2] perf report: Display average IPC and IPC coverage per symbol

[Jin, Yao]

On 11/26/2018 5:53 PM, Jiri Olsa wrote:

On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 05:40:54PM +0800, Jin Yao wrote:

SNIP

diff --git a/tools/perf/util/sort.c b/tools/perf/util/sort.c
index f96c005..94f62c8 100644
--- a/tools/perf/util/sort.c
+++ b/tools/perf/util/sort.c
@@ -13,6 +13,7 @@
  #include "strlist.h"
  #include <traceevent/event-parse.h>
  #include "mem-events.h"
+#include "annotate.h"
  #include <linux/kernel.h>

regex_t parent_regex;

@@ -422,6 +423,47 @@ struct sort_entry sort_srcline_to = {
        .se_width_idx   = HISTC_SRCLINE_TO,
  };

+static int hist_entry__sym_ipc_snprintf(struct hist_entry *he, char *bf,

+                                       size_t size, unsigned int width)
+{
+
+       struct symbol *sym = he->ms.sym;
+       struct map *map = he->ms.map;
+       struct perf_evsel *evsel = hists_to_evsel(he->hists);
+       struct annotation *notes;
+       double ipc = 0.0, coverage = 0.0;
+       char tmp[64];
+
+       if (!sym)
+               return repsep_snprintf(bf, size, "%-*s", width, "-");
+
+       if (!sym->annotated &&
+           symbol__annotate2(sym, map, evsel, &annotation__default_options,
+                             NULL) < 0) {
+               return 0;
+       }
+
+       sym->annotated = true;

I don't like this being set in here.. please move it to
symbol__annotate2 or symbol__annotate, not sure which
one of these is the best fit

I have set this flag in symbol__annotate2 in v2.

+       notes = symbol__annotation(sym);
+
+       if (notes->hit_cycles)
+               ipc = notes->hit_insn / ((double)notes->hit_cycles);
+
+       if (notes->total_insn)
+               coverage = notes->cover_insn * 100.0 /
+                       ((double)notes->total_insn);

missing { } for multiline code in 'if' condition

Fixed, thanks!

Thanks
Jin Yao

thanks,
jirka