Em Fri, Oct 04, 2019 at 05:30:46PM +0100, John Garry escreveu: > > > > > > > > > The missing events were originally mentioned in > > > > > > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/6/14/645, when upstreaming the JSONs > > > > > > > initially. > > > > > > > > > It also includes a fix for a DDRC eventname. > > > > > > > > Could I get these JSON updates picked up please? Maybe they were > > > > > > missed > > > > > > earlier. Let me know if I should re-post. > > > > > > > Looking at them now. > > > > > > It would be really good if somehow we managed to have someone from the > > > > ARM community to check and provide a Reviewed-by for those, i.e. someone > > > > else than the poster to look at it and check that its ok, would that be > > > > possible? > > > > > For this specific case, I'm not sure how much traction or value there > > > would > > > be since we're just adding some missing events for custom IP. > > > > Someone else inside your organization? > > For this, sure. Colleague Shaokun (cc'ed) provided me the metadata for these > JSON additions, so when he returns from national vacation I can ask him to > provide necessary tags.
Ok > If nobody is available, then so > > be it, let that be clear in the JSON file (see below) and then I > > wouldn't be waiting for acks/reviewed-by messages for such cases. > > > > > But I do agree that more review of JSONs from the community is required - > > > as > > > I brought up here regarding a recent addition: > > > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/[email protected]/ > > > > > > Can we enforce that at least [email protected] and/or > > > get_maintainer.pl results is cc'ed on anything ARM specific as a start? > > > > I think this should be the case, would you be willing to add a note to > > that effect at the top of the JSON files? > > Adding notes to JSONs would be painful unless the parser is updated to to > filter them out. And, as I understand, the x86 JSONs are autogenerated, so > that tooling would need to handle this also. Ok > > > > And an extra note at tools/perf/pmu-events/README telling users to look > > at the json files to figure out what Reviewed-by tags are required for > > something to get merged? One extra Reviewed-by would be ok?Who would be > > the reviewers for each arch? Would that be at the top of the JSON file? > > There is no per-arch JSON, and, in addition, I think that would be hard to > formulate such formal rules. Ok > As an alternative, how about just add a maintainers entry for reviewers per > arch? As a start, I don't mind being added there for arm64: > > --- a/MAINTAINERS > +++ b/MAINTAINERS > @@ -12767,6 +12767,10 @@ F: arch/*/events/* > F: arch/*/events/*/* > F: tools/perf/ > > +PERFORMANCE EVENTS SUBSYSTEM ARM64 PMU EVENTS > +R: John Garry <[email protected]> > +F: tools/perf/pmu-events/arch/arm64 > + > > Patches per-arch should have some nod/tag from a member of the respective > list. Or at very least be cc'ed :) Another Ok, please send a formal patch, and it would be really nice if the other ARM folks would... Ack that ;-) :-) And provide extra entries for the other pmu-events directories or even for specific files, which is a possibility, right? On my side I'll script a bit more and make sure that a post commit hook warns me if the right tag is not present. - Arnaldo
