[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220211152026.GC475776@leoy-ThinkPad-X240s>
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2022 23:20:26 +0800
From: Leo Yan <leo.yan@...aro.org>
To: James Clark <james.clark@....com>
Cc: acme@...nel.org, linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org,
mathieu.poirier@...aro.org, coresight@...ts.linaro.org,
Mike Leach <mike.leach@...aro.org>,
John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] perf: cs-etm: No-op refactor of synth opt usage
On Thu, Feb 10, 2022 at 08:06:19PM +0000, James Clark wrote:
> sample_branches and sample_instructions are already saved in the
> synth_opts struct. Other usages like synth_opts.last_branch don't save
> a value, so make this more consistent by always going through synth_opts
> and not saving duplicate values.
>
> Signed-off-by: James Clark <james.clark@....com>
The patch looks good to me:
Reviewed-by: Leo Yan <leo.yan@...aro.org>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists