Hi Arnaldo,
On Wed, 18 Dec 2013 14:39:07 -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> Em Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 02:35:28PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu:
>> Em Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 04:38:49PM +0100, Jiri Olsa escreveu:
>> > > +static int64_t _sort__addr_cmp(u64 left_ip, u64 right_ip)
>> > > +
Em Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 02:35:28PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu:
> Em Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 04:38:49PM +0100, Jiri Olsa escreveu:
> > > +static int64_t _sort__addr_cmp(u64 left_ip, u64 right_ip)
> > > +{
> > > + return (int64_t)(right_ip - left_ip);
> > > +}
> > > +
> >
> > what's the r
Em Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 04:38:49PM +0100, Jiri Olsa escreveu:
> On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 02:21:09PM +0900, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> > From: Namhyung Kim
> >
> > If a hist entry doesn't have symbol information, compare it with its
> > address. Currently it only compares its level or whether it's NULL
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 02:21:09PM +0900, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> From: Namhyung Kim
>
> If a hist entry doesn't have symbol information, compare it with its
> address. Currently it only compares its level or whether it's NULL.
> This can lead to an undesired result like an overhead exceeds 100%
>
From: Namhyung Kim
If a hist entry doesn't have symbol information, compare it with its
address. Currently it only compares its level or whether it's NULL.
This can lead to an undesired result like an overhead exceeds 100%
especially when callchain accumulation is enabled by later patch.
Cc: St
5 matches
Mail list logo
