Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1383385
| From | Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH v5 1/6] perf tools: Derive trigger class from auxtrace_snapshot |
| Date | 2016-04-20 15:30 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <rq0mC-5D-3@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <rpiOB-7ii-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <rpiOC-7ii-37@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
Hello,
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 02:55:27PM +0000, Wang Nan wrote:
> Use 'trigger' to model operations which need to be executed when
> an event (a signal, for example) is observed.
>
> States and transits:
>
> OFF--(on)--> READY --(toggle)--> TOGGLED
> ^ |
> | (ready)
> | |
> \__________________/
>
> is_toggled and is_ready are two key functions to query the state of
> a trigger. is_toggled means the event already happen; is_ready means the
> trigger is waiting for the event.
Not sure 'toggle' is the right word in this case. Maybe 'set/reset'
or 'ready/hit' can be used, if each operation is one-way. But this is
not a big deal anyway.
Btw why not split this patch into two parts - introducing trigger
logic and replacing snapshot code with the trigger?
>
> Signed-off-by: Wang Nan <wangnan0@huawei.com>
> Cc: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>
> Cc: He Kuang <hekuang@huawei.com>
> Cc: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>
> Cc: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>
> Cc: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
> Cc: Zefan Li <lizefan@huawei.com>
> Cc: pi3orama@163.com
> ---
[SNIP]
> +#define __TRIGGER_VAR(n) n##_state
> +#define __DEF_TRIGGER_VOID_FUNC(n, op) \
> +static inline void n##_##op(void) {trigger_##op(&__TRIGGER_VAR(n)); }
> +#define __DEF_TRIGGER_BOOL_FUNC(n, op) \
> +static inline bool n##_##op(void) {return trigger_##op(&__TRIGGER_VAR(n)); }
> +
> +#define DEFINE_TRIGGER(n) \
> +struct trigger n##_state = {.state = TRIGGER_OFF, .name = #n}; \
> +__DEF_TRIGGER_VOID_FUNC(n, on) \
> +__DEF_TRIGGER_VOID_FUNC(n, ready) \
> +__DEF_TRIGGER_VOID_FUNC(n, toggle) \
> +__DEF_TRIGGER_VOID_FUNC(n, off) \
> +__DEF_TRIGGER_VOID_FUNC(n, error) \
> +__DEF_TRIGGER_BOOL_FUNC(n, is_ready) \
> +__DEF_TRIGGER_BOOL_FUNC(n, is_toggled) \
> +__DEF_TRIGGER_BOOL_FUNC(n, is_error)
Why did you define all functions for each trigger variable? Wouldn't
it be better using generic trigger code and passing the trigger instead?
Thanks,
Namhyung
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH v5 1/6] perf tools: Derive trigger class from auxtrace_snapshot Wang Nan <wangnan0@huawei.com> - 2016-04-18 17:00 +0200 Re: [PATCH v5 1/6] perf tools: Derive trigger class from auxtrace_snapshot Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com> - 2016-04-20 09:50 +0200 Re: [PATCH v5 1/6] perf tools: Derive trigger class from auxtrace_snapshot Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org> - 2016-04-20 15:30 +0200
csiph-web