From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1754620AbbILLD7 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Sat, 12 Sep 2015 07:03:59 -0400
Received: from mail-wi0-f170.google.com ([209.85.212.170]:33810 "EHLO
	mail-wi0-f170.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1751325AbbILLD6 (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Sat, 12 Sep 2015 07:03:58 -0400
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 2015 12:03:55 +0100
From: Matt Fleming <matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>
To: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>
Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
        Vince Weaver <vince@deater.net>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Kanaka Juvva <kanaka.d.juvva@intel.com>,
        Vikas Shivappa <vikas.shivappa@intel.com>,
        Matt Fleming <matt.fleming@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] perf tests: Add arch tests
Message-ID: <20150912110355.GG2796@codeblueprint.co.uk>
References: <1441479742-15402-1-git-send-email-matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>
 <1441479742-15402-3-git-send-email-matt@codeblueprint.co.uk>
 <20150907122814.GG5806@krava.brq.redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20150907122814.GG5806@krava.brq.redhat.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Mon, 07 Sep, at 02:28:14PM, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 05, 2015 at 08:02:21PM +0100, Matt Fleming wrote:
> 
> SNIP
> 
> >  };
> >  
> > +static struct test *tests[] = {
> > +	generic_tests,
> > +	arch_tests,
> > +};
> > +
> >  static bool perf_test__matches(struct test *test, int curr, int argc, const char *argv[])
> >  {
> >  	int i;
> > @@ -237,7 +229,11 @@ static int run_test(struct test *test)
> >  	return err;
> >  }
> >  
> > -#define for_each_test(t)	 for (t = &tests[0]; t->func; t++)
> > +static unsigned int ___j;		/* This is obviously not thread-safe */
> > +
> > +#define for_each_test(t)	 				\
> > +	for (___j = 0; ___j < ARRAY_SIZE(tests); ___j++)	\
> > +		for (t = &tests[___j][0]; t->func; t++)
> 
> why not have ____j on stack and pas it into for_each_test
> 
> for_each_test(j, t)                                     
> ...

Right, I made a conscious decision to not do that because I didn't
want the caller to have to care about providing an iterator variable.
It also makes the diff slightly bigger.

But I don't feel that strongly about it, so I'll make this change.

-- 
Matt Fleming, Intel Open Source Technology Center