Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 24 Feb 2016 14:21:58 +0100 | From | Jiri Olsa <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 16/48] perf core: Add backward attribute to perf event |
| |
On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 02:08:50PM +0100, Jiri Olsa wrote: > On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 09:10:43AM +0000, Wang Nan wrote: > > SNIP > > > + if (is_write_backward(output_event) != is_write_backward(event)) > > + goto out; > > + > > + /* > > * If both events generate aux data, they must be on the same PMU > > */ > > if (has_aux(event) && has_aux(output_event) && > > diff --git a/kernel/events/ring_buffer.c b/kernel/events/ring_buffer.c > > index 37c11c6..80b1fa7 100644 > > --- a/kernel/events/ring_buffer.c > > +++ b/kernel/events/ring_buffer.c > > @@ -233,6 +233,8 @@ out: > > int perf_output_begin(struct perf_output_handle *handle, > > struct perf_event *event, unsigned int size) > > { > > + if (unlikely(is_write_backward(event))) > > + return __perf_output_begin(handle, event, size, true); > > return __perf_output_begin(handle, event, size, false); > > could this be just: > return __perf_output_begin(handle, event, size, > is_write_backward(event)) > > also not sure if it's worth to have __perf_output_begin > if the only difference to perf_output_begin is 'backward' > argument that could be figured out from the event argument > anyway
nevermind my second comment, just saw it being used also in next patches ;-)
jirka
| |