From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] tools/perf/metricgroup: Fix printing event names of
 metric group with multiple events incase of overlapping events
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2020 13:11:35 +0100
Message-ID: <20200210121135.GI1907700@krava>
References: <20200131052522.7267-1-kjain@linux.ibm.com>
 <20200206184510.GA1669706@krava>
 <51a4b570eb47e80801a460c89acf20d13a269600.camel@perches.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <51a4b570eb47e80801a460c89acf20d13a269600.camel@perches.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
To: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Cc: Kajol Jain <kjain@linux.ibm.com>, acme@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>, Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>, Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>, Kan Liang <kan.liang@linux.intel.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, Jin Yao <yao.jin@linux.intel.com>, Madhavan Srinivasan <maddy@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, Anju T Sudhakar <anju@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@linux.ibm.com>
List-Id: linux-perf-users.vger.kernel.org

On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 10:58:12AM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Thu, 2020-02-06 at 19:45 +0100, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 10:55:22AM +0530, Kajol Jain wrote:
> > 
> > SNIP
> > 
> > >  				ev->metric_leader = metric_events[i];
> > >  			}
> > > +			j++;
> > >  		}
> > > +		ev = metric_events[i];
> > > +		evlist_used[ev->idx] = true;
> > >  	}
> > >  
> > >  	return metric_events[0];
> > > @@ -160,6 +161,9 @@ static int metricgroup__setup_events(struct list_head *groups,
> > >  	int ret = 0;
> > >  	struct egroup *eg;
> > >  	struct evsel *evsel;
> > > +	bool evlist_used[perf_evlist->core.nr_entries];
> > > +
> > > +	memset(evlist_used, 0, perf_evlist->core.nr_entries);
> > 
> > I know I posted this in the previous email, but are we sure bool
> > is always 1 byte?  would sizeod(evlist_used) be safer?
> > 
> > other than that it looks ok
> > 
> > Andi, you're ok with this?
> 
> stack declarations of variable length arrays are not
> a good thing.
> 
> https://lwn.net/Articles/749089/
> 
> and
> 
> 	bool evlist_used[perf_evlist->core.nr_entries] = {};

hum, I think we already have few of them in perf ;-)
thanks for the link

right, that initialization is of course much better, thanks

jirka