On Fri, Nov 16, 2018 at 04:05:11PM -0700, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
[...]
-static int cs_etm__flush(struct cs_etm_queue *etmq) +static int cs_etm__flush(struct cs_etm_queue *etmq, bool new_packet) { int err = 0; struct cs_etm_auxtrace *etm = etmq->etm; @@ -989,6 +989,20 @@ static int cs_etm__flush(struct cs_etm_queue *etmq) }
- /*
* If 'new_packet' is false, this time call has no a new packet* coming and 'etmq->packet' contains the stale packet which is* set at the previous time with packets swapping. In this case* this function is invoked only for flushing branch stack at* the end of buffer handling.** Simply to say, branch samples should be generated when every* time receive one new packet; otherwise, directly bail out to* avoid generate branch sample with stale packet.*/- if (!new_packet)
return 0;- if (etm->sample_branches && etmq->prev_packet->sample_type == CS_ETM_RANGE) { err = cs_etm__synth_branch_sample(etmq);
@@ -1075,7 +1089,7 @@ static int cs_etm__run_decoder(struct cs_etm_queue *etmq) * Discontinuity in trace, flush * previous branch stack */
cs_etm__flush(etmq);
cs_etm__flush(etmq, true); break; case CS_ETM_EMPTY: /*@@ -1092,7 +1106,7 @@ static int cs_etm__run_decoder(struct cs_etm_queue *etmq) if (err == 0) /* Flush any remaining branch stack entries */
err = cs_etm__flush(etmq);
err = cs_etm__flush(etmq, false);I understand what you're doing and it will yield the correct results. What I'm not sure about is if we wouldn't be better off splitting cs_etm__flush() in order to reduce the complexity of the main decoding loop. That is rename cs_etm__flush() to something like cs_etm__trace_on() and spin off a new cs_etm__end_block().
It does introduce a little bit of code duplication but I think we'd win in terms of readability and flexibility.
Sorry for long delay, Mathieu.
Agree with the idea of splitting cs_etm__flush() into two functions. Will spin patch for new version.
Thanks, Leo Yan
} return err; -- 2.7.4