On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 3:07 PM, Jiri Olsa <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 04:41:35PM +0100, Stephane Eranian wrote: >> Ensure we grab the weight from raw sample struct >> and that we can dump it via perf report -D. >> >> Signed-off-by: Stephane Eranian <[email protected]> >> --- >> tools/perf/util/event.h | 1 + >> tools/perf/util/evsel.c | 5 +++++ >> tools/perf/util/session.c | 3 +++ >> 3 files changed, 9 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/event.h b/tools/perf/util/event.h >> index 0d573ff..cf52977 100644 >> --- a/tools/perf/util/event.h >> +++ b/tools/perf/util/event.h >> @@ -90,6 +90,7 @@ struct perf_sample { >> u64 period; >> u32 cpu; >> u32 raw_size; >> + u64 weight; >> void *raw_data; >> struct ip_callchain *callchain; >> struct branch_stack *branch_stack; >> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/evsel.c b/tools/perf/util/evsel.c >> index 1b16dd1..4374c07 100644 >> --- a/tools/perf/util/evsel.c >> +++ b/tools/perf/util/evsel.c >> @@ -1058,6 +1058,11 @@ int perf_evsel__parse_sample(struct perf_evsel >> *evsel, union perf_event *event, >> } >> } >> >> + if (type & PERF_SAMPLE_WEIGHT) { >> + data->weight= *array; >> + array++; >> + } >> + > > this bit should be placed right after PERF_SAMPLE_PERIOD (where > you placed it in kernel path), otherwise you get wrong data >
Thought some more about this. I think this new WEIGHT sample type is in the wrong place in Andi's patch. It's new, it should be put at the end of perf_output_sample(). That's necessary to ensure older versions of perf (without the knowledge about WEIGHT) can still decode PERF_SAMPLE_READ in case PERF_SAMPLE_WEIGHT is present in the perf.data file. I will update his patch to reflect this change. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
