[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c1aedc2e-e51b-4b17-a05e-cd347f56d83b@intel.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2023 10:15:07 +0200
From: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>
To: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>
Cc: Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org,
Thomas Richter <tmricht@...ux.ibm.com>,
James Clark <james.clark@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] perf test: Simplify object code reading test
On 3/11/23 21:55, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> It tries cycles (or cpu-clock on s390) event with exclude_kernel bit to
> open. But other arch on a VM can fail with the hardware event and need
> to fallback to the software event in the same way.
>
> So let's get rid of the cpuid check and use generic fallback mechanism
> using an array of event candidates. Now event in the odd index excludes
> the kernel so use that for the return value.
>
> Cc: Thomas Richter <tmricht@...ux.ibm.com>
> Tested-by: James Clark <james.clark@....com>
> Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
Reviewed-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists