Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 11 Jul 2023 15:15:55 +0100 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 4/4] perf: Remove unused PERF_PMU_CAP_HETEROGENEOUS_CPUS capability | From | James Clark <> |
| |
On 11/07/2023 13:10, Anshuman Khandual wrote: > > > On 7/10/23 17:51, James Clark wrote: >> Since commit bd2756811766 ("perf: Rewrite core context handling") the >> relationship between perf_event_context and PMUs has changed so that >> the error scenario that PERF_PMU_CAP_HETEROGENEOUS_CPUS originally >> silenced no longer exists. >> >> Remove the capability to avoid confusion that it actually influences >> any perf core behavior. This change should be a no-op. >> >> Signed-off-by: James Clark <james.clark@arm.com> >> --- >> include/linux/perf_event.h | 2 +- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/include/linux/perf_event.h b/include/linux/perf_event.h >> index d5628a7b5eaa..3f4d941fd6c5 100644 >> --- a/include/linux/perf_event.h >> +++ b/include/linux/perf_event.h >> @@ -288,7 +288,7 @@ struct perf_event_pmu_context; >> #define PERF_PMU_CAP_EXTENDED_REGS 0x0008 >> #define PERF_PMU_CAP_EXCLUSIVE 0x0010 >> #define PERF_PMU_CAP_ITRACE 0x0020 >> -#define PERF_PMU_CAP_HETEROGENEOUS_CPUS 0x0040 >> +/* Unused 0x0040 */ > > Small nit, "Unused" marking might not be required here. >
But then it would be very easy to miss that there is a free bit if I don't leave the comment. Is it really better without it?
I could shift all the following ones down by one bit, but it would be a lot of work to make sure that nobody has hard coded some check for one of the bits instead of using the define somewhere.
>> #define PERF_PMU_CAP_NO_EXCLUDE 0x0080 >> #define PERF_PMU_CAP_AUX_OUTPUT 0x0100 >> #define PERF_PMU_CAP_EXTENDED_HW_TYPE 0x0200
| |