From: Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>
To: Alexey Budankov <alexey.budankov@linux.intel.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
        Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>, Kan Liang <kan.liang@intel.com>,
        Dmitri Prokhorov <Dmitry.Prohorov@intel.com>,
        Valery Cherepennikov <valery.cherepennikov@intel.com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
        Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>,
        David Carrillo-Cisneros <davidcc@google.com>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/3] perf/core: use rb trees for pinned/flexible groups
In-Reply-To: <c882a2d5-4b76-e838-f812-0b4f70b0e3f7@linux.intel.com>
References: <96c7776f-1f17-a39e-23e9-658596216d6b@linux.intel.com> <d98d9399-7292-e14d-5988-adc474f4e54a@linux.intel.com> <20170803130002.oatczvnaalplrsep@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <86cbe0b0-a1ec-4d5f-addc-87bccf2e97d7@linux.intel.com> <20170804143628.34c2xqxl2e6k2arj@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <9d2e25c9-209c-f28a-d601-d3f1a71f032f@linux.intel.com> <c882a2d5-4b76-e838-f812-0b4f70b0e3f7@linux.intel.com>
User-Agent: Notmuch/0.23.7 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/25.1.1 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2017 16:51:53 +0300
Message-ID: <87lgm2xz0m.fsf@ashishki-desk.ger.corp.intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1206
Lines: 36

Alexey Budankov <alexey.budankov@linux.intel.com> writes:

> Now I figured that not all indexed events are always located under 
> the root with the same cpu, and it depends on the order of insertion
> e.g. with insertion order 01,02,03,14,15,16 we get this:
>
>      02
>     /  \
>    01  14
>       /  \
>      03  15
>            \
>            16
>
> and it is unclear how to iterate cpu==0 part of tree in this case.

Using this example, rb_next() should take you through the nodes in this
order (assuming you start with 01): 01, 02, 03, 14, etc. So you iterate
while event->cpu==cpu using rb_next() and you should be fine.

> Iterating cpu specific subtree like this:
>
> #define for_each_group_event(event, group, cpu, pmu, field)	 \
> 	for (event = rb_entry_safe(group_first(group, cpu, pmu), \
> 				   typeof(*event), field);	 \
> 	     event && event->cpu == cpu && event->pmu == pmu;	 \
> 	     event = rb_entry_safe(rb_next(&event->field),	 \
> 				   typeof(*event), field))

Afaict, this assumes that you are also ordering on event->pmu, which
should be reflected in your _less function. And also assuming that
group_first() is doing the right thing. Can we see the code?

Regards,
--
Alex