From: "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@linux.intel.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: mingo@redhat.com, acme@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
mark.rutland@arm.com, alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com,
jolsa@kernel.org, namhyung@kernel.org, irogers@google.com,
adrian.hunter@intel.com, ak@linux.intel.com, eranian@google.com,
alexey.v.bayduraev@linux.intel.com, tinghao.zhang@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 4/7] perf/x86/intel: Support LBR event logging
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2023 10:28:52 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <6850dc71-e709-42ce-9113-9cb5a7a590f7@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231019110056.GH36211@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On 2023-10-19 7:00 a.m., Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 04, 2023 at 11:40:41AM -0700, kan.liang@linux.intel.com wrote:
>
>> +static ssize_t branch_counter_width_show(struct device *cdev,
>> + struct device_attribute *attr,
>> + char *buf)
>> +{
>> + return snprintf(buf, PAGE_SIZE, "2\n");
>> +}
>
>> +#define ARCH_LBR_EVENT_LOG_WIDTH 2
>
> I'm assuming this is the same '2' ? And having it hard-coded in two
> locations is awesome..
>
>> +#define ARCH_LBR_EVENT_LOG_MASK 0x3
>
> Should probably be ((1<<2)-1)
>
> As per that other email, the naming is confusing, should this not be:
>
> ARCH_LBR_EVENT_COUNTER_BITS
>
> or, since it's all local to lbr.c something shorter still, like:
>
> LBR_COUNTER_BITS
>
> hmm?
Sure, I will use the name LBR_COUNTER_BITS.
Thanks,
Kan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-10-19 14:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-10-04 18:40 [PATCH V4 1/7] perf: Add branch stack counters kan.liang
2023-10-04 18:40 ` [PATCH V4 2/7] perf/x86: Add PERF_X86_EVENT_NEEDS_BRANCH_STACK flag kan.liang
2023-10-04 18:40 ` [PATCH V4 3/7] perf: Add branch_sample_call_stack kan.liang
2023-10-04 18:40 ` [PATCH V4 4/7] perf/x86/intel: Support LBR event logging kan.liang
2023-10-19 9:23 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-10-19 13:56 ` Liang, Kan
2023-10-19 9:26 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-10-19 13:58 ` Liang, Kan
2023-10-19 10:52 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-10-19 14:26 ` Liang, Kan
2023-10-19 18:18 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-10-19 11:00 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-10-19 14:28 ` Liang, Kan [this message]
2023-10-19 11:09 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-10-19 14:31 ` Liang, Kan
2023-10-19 11:12 ` Peter Zijlstra
2023-10-20 12:45 ` Liang, Kan
2023-10-04 18:40 ` [PATCH V4 5/7] tools headers UAPI: Sync include/uapi/linux/perf_event.h header with the kernel kan.liang
2023-10-04 18:40 ` [PATCH V4 6/7] perf header: Support num and width of branch counters kan.liang
2023-10-04 18:40 ` [PATCH V4 7/7] perf tools: Add branch counter knob kan.liang
2023-10-16 17:48 ` [PATCH V4 1/7] perf: Add branch stack counters Liang, Kan
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=6850dc71-e709-42ce-9113-9cb5a7a590f7@linux.intel.com \
--to=kan.liang@linux.intel.com \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=adrian.hunter@intel.com \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
--cc=alexey.v.bayduraev@linux.intel.com \
--cc=eranian@google.com \
--cc=irogers@google.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tinghao.zhang@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox