Hello, On Fri, 24 Oct 2025 at 07:49, Tomasz Duszynski <[email protected]> wrote: > > This series does some cleanup and refactoring around the rc1 code like: > trimming unused headers, > switching to callbacks for per-arch handling, and adding trace support. It > also re-enables existing > base test to help catch reported issues on some architectures. > > v11: > - rebase series > - hide calls to experimental syms in inline helpers > v10: > - fix build without ALLOW_EXPERIMENTAL_API > - move rte_pmu_tread_read() registration to avoid MSVC linker issues > v9: > - properly rebase patch integrating pmu and trace > v8: > - export __rte_pmu_trace_read from library itself to avoid build issues > with msvc linker > v7: > - change test return value > v6: > - add more logs to functional test > - skip test in case of setup failure, user must make sure > system is properly configured to get valid results > v5: > - add missing patch that quiesces chincs check > v4: > - change fast test so that it won't fail on misconfigured system > - fix compilation on windows > v3: > - do not export __rte_pmu_trace_read because that breaks compilation > on windows - script generating map files does not handle conditional > compilation > - skip testing if paranoia is at wrong level > v2: > - explicitly check against NULL > - make pmu lib optional by checking if dpdk config has RTE_LIB_PMU >
Strange output in the cover letter. Shortlog shows 10 patches: > Tomasz Duszynski (10): Followed by 8 lines: > trace: change scope of conditional block > lib/pmu: export only necessary arch headers > lib/pmu: reimplement per-arch ops as callbacks > lib/pmu: do not try enabling perf counter access on arm64 > lib/pmu: use build system defined RTE_LIB_PMU macro > test/pmu: enable test > trace: add PMU > lib/pmu: fix out-of-bound access But the series has 9 patches. In any case, - patch 2 "trace: change scope of conditional block" is unneeded, I see nothing wrong with current code. I tried stopping at various points of the series, no build issue, - patch 7 has a comment from Morten, - patch 8 has comments from me, - patch 9 is vague, what is this about? Fixing coverity or some static analysis tool bug report? I applied the rest of the series, as other patches look valid fixes / cleanups. -- David Marchand
