[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87y3x4j4ho.fsf@ashishki-desk.ger.corp.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2017 16:06:59 +0200
From: Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>
To: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, marc.zyngier@....com,
mark.rutland@....com, kim.phillips@....com, alex.bennee@...aro.org,
christoffer.dall@...aro.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
peterz@...radead.org, robh@...nel.org, suzuki.poulose@....com,
pawel.moll@....com, mathieu.poirier@...aro.org, mingo@...hat.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/10] perf: Directly pass PERF_AUX_* flags to perf_aux_output_end
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com> writes:
> On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 03:40:23PM +0200, Alexander Shishkin wrote:
>> Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com> writes:
>>
>> > @@ -485,7 +485,8 @@ int intel_bts_interrupt(void)
>> > return handled;
>> >
>> > perf_aux_output_end(&bts->handle, local_xchg(&buf->data_size, 0),
>> > - !!local_xchg(&buf->lost, 0));
>> > + local_xchg(&buf->lost, 0) ?
>> > + PERF_AUX_FLAG_OVERWRITE : 0);
>>
>> Heh, this one would have taken some time to debug. :)
>
> Don't worry, this isn't a bug fix! This patch changes the prototype for
> perf_aux_output_end so that it takes the flag instead of a "bool truncated"
> parameter, so this is just fixing up the callers at the same time.
Yeah, I got that, what I'm saying is that the above should be
PERF_AUX_FLAG_TRUNCATED, not OVERWRITE. I only spotted it by accident.
Regards,
--
Alex
Powered by blists - more mailing lists