MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20220105061351.120843-1-irogers@google.com> <20220105061351.120843-3-irogers@google.com>
 <57ab982e-ecc1-3f49-c580-0a251e29698b@huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <57ab982e-ecc1-3f49-c580-0a251e29698b@huawei.com>
From:   Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>
Date:   Mon, 10 Jan 2022 09:36:49 -0800
Message-ID: <CAP-5=fWT_19OfZTTjvLUcChV4nDwqc5Zq4VE93Gak6OO4NORsA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 02/48] perf stat: Add aggr creators that are passed a cpu.
To:     John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com>
Cc:     Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>,
        Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
        Kajol Jain <kjain@linux.ibm.com>,
        "Paul A . Clarke" <pc@us.ibm.com>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
        Riccardo Mancini <rickyman7@gmail.com>,
        Kan Liang <kan.liang@linux.intel.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
        linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Vineet Singh <vineet.singh@intel.com>,
        James Clark <james.clark@arm.com>,
        Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org>,
        Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
        Mike Leach <mike.leach@linaro.org>,
        Leo Yan <leo.yan@linaro.org>, coresight@lists.linaro.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, zhengjun.xing@intel.com,
        eranian@google.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 9:10 AM John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com> wrote:
>
> On 05/01/2022 06:13, Ian Rogers wrote:
> >
> > +struct aggr_cpu_id cpu_map__get_socket(struct perf_cpu_map *map, int idx,
> > +                                    void *data)
> > +{
> > +     if (idx < 0 || idx > map->nr)
> > +             return cpu_map__empty_aggr_cpu_id();
> > +
> > +     return cpu_map__get_socket_aggr_by_cpu(map->map[idx], data);
> > +}
> > +
>
>
> This is later deleted in the series. Can the series be reworked so that
> we don't add stuff and then later delete it? One reason for that
> approach is that we don't spend time reviewing something which will be
> deleted, especially in such a big series...

Hi John,

I think you are asking to squash:
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220105061351.120843-8-irogers@google.com/
into this change. There are other  similar related changes that may
also be squashed. The changes are trying to introduce a new API and
then add changes to switch over to using it. This is with a view to
making bisection easier, have each change only do 1 thing and so on. I
believe the format of the patches is house style, but it is fine to
squash changes together too. Having sent patches to Arnaldo and having
had them split I'm reluctant to do a v5 with them squashed without him
expressing a preference.

Thanks,
Ian

> If it really makes sense to do it this way then fine.
>
> Thanks,
> John