Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 19 Jan 2023 15:56:55 +0000 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v4 6/8] perf cs_etm: Record ts_source in AUXTRACE_INFO for ETMv4 and ETE | From | Suzuki K Poulose <> |
| |
On 19/01/2023 15:43, James Clark wrote: > From: German Gomez <german.gomez@arm.com> > > Read the value of ts_source exposed by the driver and store it in the > ETMv4 and ETE header. If the interface doesn't exist (such as in older > Kernels), defaults to a safe value of -1.
Super minor nits feel free to ignore.
> > Signed-off-by: German Gomez <german.gomez@arm.com> > Signed-off-by: James Clark <james.clark@arm.com> > --- > tools/perf/arch/arm/util/cs-etm.c | 48 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > tools/perf/util/cs-etm-base.c | 2 ++ > tools/perf/util/cs-etm.h | 2 ++ > 3 files changed, 52 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/tools/perf/arch/arm/util/cs-etm.c b/tools/perf/arch/arm/util/cs-etm.c > index b526ffe550a5..481e170cd3f1 100644 > --- a/tools/perf/arch/arm/util/cs-etm.c > +++ b/tools/perf/arch/arm/util/cs-etm.c > @@ -53,6 +53,7 @@ static const char * const metadata_etmv4_ro[] = { > [CS_ETMV4_TRCIDR2] = "trcidr/trcidr2", > [CS_ETMV4_TRCIDR8] = "trcidr/trcidr8", > [CS_ETMV4_TRCAUTHSTATUS] = "mgmt/trcauthstatus", > + [CS_ETMV4_TS_SOURCE] = "ts_source", > }; > > static const char * const metadata_ete_ro[] = { > @@ -62,6 +63,7 @@ static const char * const metadata_ete_ro[] = { > [CS_ETE_TRCIDR8] = "trcidr/trcidr8", > [CS_ETE_TRCAUTHSTATUS] = "mgmt/trcauthstatus", > [CS_ETE_TRCDEVARCH] = "mgmt/trcdevarch", > + [CS_ETE_TS_SOURCE] = "ts_source", > }; > > static bool cs_etm_is_etmv4(struct auxtrace_record *itr, int cpu); > @@ -613,6 +615,32 @@ static int cs_etm_get_ro(struct perf_pmu *pmu, int cpu, const char *path) > return val; > } > > +static int cs_etm_get_ro_signed(struct perf_pmu *pmu, int cpu, const char *path)
minor nit: This doesn't necessarily care if it is RO ? Also, does it make sense to rename to include cpu relation :
say, cs_etm_pmu_cpu_get_signed() ?
> +{ > + char pmu_path[PATH_MAX]; > + int scan; > + int val = 0; > + > + /* Get RO metadata from sysfs */ > + snprintf(pmu_path, PATH_MAX, "cpu%d/%s", cpu, path); > + > + scan = perf_pmu__scan_file(pmu, pmu_path, "%d", &val); > + if (scan != 1) > + pr_err("%s: error reading: %s\n", __func__, pmu_path); > + > + return val; > +} > + > +static bool cs_etm_pmu_path_exists(struct perf_pmu *pmu, int cpu, const char *path)
nit: cs_etm_pmu_cpu_path_exists() ? To make the "cpu" relation explicit ?
Otherwise looks good to me.
Suzuki
| |