Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v13 1/8] perf tools: Drop redundant evsel->overwrite indicator | From | "Wangnan (F)" <> | Date | Wed, 6 Jul 2016 18:55:33 +0800 |
| |
On 2016/7/6 18:53, Jiri Olsa wrote: > On Mon, Jul 04, 2016 at 06:20:02AM +0000, Wang Nan wrote: > > SNIP > >> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/evsel.c b/tools/perf/util/evsel.c >> index 0fea724..3abe519 100644 >> --- a/tools/perf/util/evsel.c >> +++ b/tools/perf/util/evsel.c >> @@ -1359,6 +1359,9 @@ static int __perf_evsel__open(struct perf_evsel *evsel, struct cpu_map *cpus, >> int pid = -1, err; >> enum { NO_CHANGE, SET_TO_MAX, INCREASED_MAX } set_rlimit = NO_CHANGE; >> >> + if (perf_missing_features.write_backward && evsel->attr.write_backward) >> + return -EINVAL; >> + >> if (evsel->system_wide) >> nthreads = 1; >> else >> @@ -1389,11 +1392,6 @@ fallback_missing_features: >> if (perf_missing_features.lbr_flags) >> evsel->attr.branch_sample_type &= ~(PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_NO_FLAGS | >> PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_NO_CYCLES); >> - if (perf_missing_features.write_backward) { >> - if (evsel->overwrite) >> - return -EINVAL; >> - evsel->attr.write_backward = false; >> - } > so we don't change the attr.write_backward anymore? > based on the kernel support..
We don't need fallback here. If evsel->attr.write_backward is selected and it is missing, we should fail.
> we do it for other features, why not here? also changelog > did not mentioned it at all ;-) > > thanks, > jirka
| |