[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200622184937.GV134822@grain>
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2020 21:49:37 +0300
From: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>
To: kan.liang@...ux.intel.com
Cc: peterz@...radead.org, mingo@...hat.com, acme@...nel.org,
tglx@...utronix.de, bp@...en8.de, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mark.rutland@....com,
alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com, jolsa@...hat.com,
namhyung@...nel.org, dave.hansen@...el.com, yu-cheng.yu@...el.com,
bigeasy@...utronix.de, hpa@...or.com,
alexey.budankov@...ux.intel.com, eranian@...gle.com,
ak@...ux.intel.com, like.xu@...ux.intel.com,
yao.jin@...ux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 21/21] perf/x86/intel/lbr: Support XSAVES for arch LBR
read
On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 07:04:09AM -0700, kan.liang@...ux.intel.com wrote:
...
> +static void intel_pmu_arch_lbr_read_xsave(struct cpu_hw_events *cpuc)
> +{
> + struct x86_perf_task_context_arch_lbr_xsave *xsave = cpuc->lbr_xsave;
> + struct arch_lbr_entry *lbr;
> + int i;
> +
> + if (!xsave)
> + goto rollback;
Why not make it simplier?
if (!xsave) {
intel_pmu_arch_lbr_read(cpuc);
return;
}
The goto and "return" statement before the "rollback" label
looks pretty ugly. I'm sorry I didn't follow the series
in details so if you plan to add more handlers at "rollback"
then sure.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists