Hi Jiri,
On 4/15/2021 10:11 PM, Jiri Olsa wrote:
On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 09:36:16PM +0800, Jin, Yao wrote:
SNIP
+ int n = 0;
+
+ list_for_each(pos, list)
+ n++;
+
+ return n;
+}
+
+static int parse_events__with_hybrid_pmu(struct parse_events_state
*parse_state,
+ const char *str, char *pmu_name,
+ bool *found, struct list_head *list)
+{
+ struct parse_events_state ps = {
+ .list = LIST_HEAD_INIT(ps.list),
+ .stoken = PE_START_EVENTS,
+ .pmu_name = pmu_name,
+ .idx = parse_state->idx,
+ };
could we add this pmu_name directly to __parse_events?
Do you suggest we directly call __parse_events()?
int __parse_events(struct evlist *evlist, const char *str,
struct parse_events_error *err, struct perf_pmu *fake_pmu)
struct parse_events_state parse_state = {
.list = LIST_HEAD_INIT(parse_state.list),
.idx = evlist->core.nr_entries,
.error = err,
.evlist = evlist,
.stoken = PE_START_EVENTS,
.fake_pmu = fake_pmu,
};
But for parse_events__with_hybrid_pmu, we don't have valid evlist. So if we
switch to __parse_events, evlist processing may be a problem.
you should use parse_state->evlist no? but we can chec/make this
change in next itaration.. it's already lot of changes
jirka
With my current code,
static int parse_events__with_hybrid_pmu(struct parse_events_state *parse_state,
const char *str, char *pmu_name,
struct list_head *list)
{
struct parse_events_state ps = {
.list = LIST_HEAD_INIT(ps.list),
.stoken = PE_START_EVENTS,
.pmu_name = pmu_name,
.idx = parse_state->idx,
};
int ret;
ret = parse_events__scanner(str, &ps);
perf_pmu__parse_cleanup();
if (!ret) {
if (!list_empty(&ps.list)) {
list_splice(&ps.list, list);
parse_state->idx = ps.idx;
}
}
return ret;
}
The new created evsels are added to the tail of list (ps.list) and ps.list is joined to the list
(the parameter 'list').
If we want to reuse the __parse_events(), we may need to:
struct evlist *evlist = evlist__new();
__parse_events(evlist, str, NULL, NULL);
Add the evsels in evlist to the tail of list (the parameter 'list')
evlist__delete(evlist);
Is my understanding correct?
Yes, we have to change the interface of __parse_events() by adding a new parameter 'pmu_name', which
will bring much more changes. I agree to make this change in follow-up patches.
Thanks
Jin Yao
