Re: [PATCH 0/2] perf: add sort by inclusive time functionality (v2)

[Arun Sharma]

On 3/12/12 12:15 AM, Namhyung Kim wrote:

> I think it's because of the shared hist_entry. If a callchain is a
> subset of another, it will be marked as inclusive so that it cannot be
> contributed to total period. Say, there're two chains - X (a -> b -> c)
> and Y (a -> b), once __hists__add_entry_inclusive() was called on X, we
> have:
>
> a -> b -> c
> a -> b (inclusive)
> a (inclusive)
>
> And then, calling the function on Y should make:
>
> a -> b
> a (inclusive)
>
> However, since both callchains are in tree already they'll be shared and
> marked *inclusive*. Thus the total period will not increased at all for
> Y. Also I guess the reverse case - add Y first, and then X - will have
> the same result.

Thanks for figuring this out. Looks like using a single bit 
(he->inclusive) is insufficient. How about:

struct hist_entry {
	u64                     period;
        u64                     period_self;
	..
};

Normal mode: period_self == period.
Inclusive mode: period_self will be zero for inclusive hist_entries.
Shared entries: we sum up both period and period_self.

We can then compute total_period by summing up period_self.

 -Arun

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/