From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5CAEC364E9E; Wed, 4 Mar 2026 20:34:32 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1772656472; cv=none; b=LyQrvr3Ck7dO2HAg2e1AHw2SFH+GX+TQgIjNo5fAsVyv8b9bR0akUCn1DWtUyJDGAwnMrHVx/MgoTicE8BAxO8Ir2RCVZe2AuoaltSqhG+kPoD/847NKzjk3P4OrU6UyGcdZmmswMYY4x7M3K3gQzb8L+2PBseck0BeLjWY9E8k= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1772656472; c=relaxed/simple; bh=dQGRPzSeS1qh9wsp+smQzZroOWOr2CWSmUpLUZ9TfuY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=Q26YOsncGycdkANlWrvwL0wFG2PIY3OoQdDo4g1Yv/jpPT0EunkmOv1L8inW36HKm1gAL3juXWmLU+wY56Z4HP+2x8+lTfOsOdPWI7/tdT+xRLHufN3rCd3zOEM+DI+a4ulMQAL9ill3w41aOx1Xz8FNTR2giPEzHpyeaxmK4qU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=YDd68J1V; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="YDd68J1V" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A5C06C2BC9E; Wed, 4 Mar 2026 20:34:31 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1772656472; bh=dQGRPzSeS1qh9wsp+smQzZroOWOr2CWSmUpLUZ9TfuY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=YDd68J1VV2PdxkSHTukC7pWd0ubvFEwbe2ZD4yvj365ym4ejW5jbubJYQ+7PiZiLw rdyZ/+B0x9n9XIwVL1eoOu6RBw21Rrkw345BL4mFXEDGzXZiNcjZKeTFT3EyTo3+2O UI1HNwiTJqi28efBD9V4aMMRMnhzVMAejNbhtpCD9TEVOlRRUfQzjp45GALovvsp19 wuQPkTxrq2baP0r3hPEMLmIwqDiayVE0657Fp0fijEHPFuTmnnni4qCtkpDUAVu/QW qKOwOZj2MAU/XLVEK/nB5YROyVUIllH+U5RSbikRwsm1u9kI+qL6TEwuC4ZZfaVWoP fxF3eTFuFoM7Q== Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2026 17:34:29 -0300 From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo To: Dmitry Dolgov <9erthalion6@gmail.com> Cc: Ian Rogers , miguel.ojeda.sandonis@gmail.com, a.hindborg@kernel.org, aliceryhl@google.com, bjorn3_gh@protonmail.com, boqun@kernel.org, dakr@kernel.org, gary@garyguo.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, lossin@kernel.org, namhyung@kernel.org, ojeda@kernel.org, rust-for-linux@vger.kernel.org, tmgross@umich.edu Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] perf test type profiling: Remote typedef on struct Message-ID: References: <20260302235821.588686-1-irogers@google.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Wed, Mar 04, 2026 at 11:44:16AM +0100, Dmitry Dolgov wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 02, 2026 at 03:58:21PM -0800, Ian Rogers wrote: > > The typedef creates an issue where the struct or the typedef may > > appear in the output and cause the "perf data type profiling tests" to > > fail. Let's remove the typedef to keep the test passing. > > Yes, makes sense to me, thanks. As mentioned in the previous message, it > sounds fishy to me that perf record and perf mem record capture > different data type -- I'll try to get to the bottom of it (I was sort > of hoping to finish the cross compilation topic first, but since it's > not moving that fast, why not do some debugging here). > > Reviewed-by: Dmitrii Dolgov <9erthalion6@gmail.com> Thanks, applied to perf-tools, for v7.0. - Arnaldo