[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YG8RCCN7iszBlJu9@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2021 16:19:52 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: kan.liang@...ux.intel.com
Cc: mingo@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, acme@...nel.org,
tglx@...utronix.de, bp@...en8.de, namhyung@...nel.org,
jolsa@...hat.com, ak@...ux.intel.com, yao.jin@...ux.intel.com,
alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com, adrian.hunter@...el.com,
ricardo.neri-calderon@...ux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V5 04/25] perf/x86/intel: Hybrid PMU support for perf
capabilities
On Thu, Apr 08, 2021 at 03:40:56PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 05, 2021 at 08:10:46AM -0700, kan.liang@...ux.intel.com wrote:
> > +static inline bool intel_pmu_has_cap(struct perf_event *event, int idx)
> > +{
> > + union perf_capabilities *intel_cap;
> > +
> > + intel_cap = is_hybrid() ? &hybrid_pmu(event->pmu)->intel_cap :
> > + &x86_pmu.intel_cap;
>
> This isn't:
>
> intel_cap = &hybrid_pmu(event->pmu)->intel_cap;
Ah no, its because you want a pointer and GCC is being silly about that.
I have something for that, hold on ;-)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists