Re: [PATCH v1 1/5] libperf cpumap: Correct reference count for perf_cpu_map__merge()

[Leo Yan]

On 10/11/24 10:34, Leo Yan wrote:

> > The 2 non-test uses of perf_cpu_map__merge both do:
> >
> >          a = perf_cpu_map__merge(a, b);
> >
> > so another way to make the API less misleading would be
> > to introduce:
> >
> >          err = perf_cpu_map__merge_in(&a, b);
> >
> > where:
> >
> > int perf_cpu_map__merge_in(struct perf_cpu_map **orig, struct perf_cpu_map 
> > *other)
> > {
> >          struct perf_cpu_map *result = perf_cpu_map__merge(*orig, other);
> >
> >          if (!result)
> >                  return -ENOMEM;
> >
> >          *orig = result;
> >          return 0;
> > }
> >
> > without any changes to perf_cpu_map__merge().
>
> Just wandering why we cannot do the same thing for the perf_cpu_map__merge()
> function?
>
>    int perf_cpu_map__merge_in(struct perf_cpu_map **orig,
>                               struct perf_cpu_map *other)

Sorry for typo and spamming. The above suggested definition is for 
perf_cpu_map__merge().


> This can allow us to avoid any confusion in the first place. And we don't need
> to maintain two functions for the same thing.
>
> Thanks,
> Leo