On Mon, Jul 06, 2020 at 09:32:22AM -0400, Liang, Kan wrote: > > > On 7/6/2020 6:25 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 03, 2020 at 04:59:49PM -0400, Liang, Kan wrote: > > > On 7/3/2020 3:50 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > > > > If I'm not mistaken, this correctly deals with LBR_FORMAT_INFO, so can't > > > > we also use the intel_pmu_arch_lbr_read() function for that case? > > > > > > But the intel_pmu_arch_lbr_read() doesn't have the optimization > > > (LBR_NO_INFO) for the LBR_FORMAT_INFO. > > > https://lkml.kernel.org/r/[email protected] > > > > > > To apply the optimization, we need extra codes as below. > > > > Right, I saw that, but shouldn't we support that for anything with this > > format anyway? That is, it's weird and inconsistent to not support > > PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_NO_{CYCLES,FLAGS} for PEBS/ARCH-LBR output. > > > > OK. I will support NO_{CYCLES,FLAGS} for PEBS/ARCH-LBR to make the output > consistent. > > > Arguably, we should even support NO_CYCLES for FORMAT_TIME. Yes it's > > daft, but that's what you get for adding the ABI. > > > > I will add another patch to support NO_{CYCLES,FLAGS} for FORMAT_TIME. > > The two patches will be on top of the "Support Architectural LBR" series. > Can I send the two patches in a separate thread?
Yes please, I have these queued up, I'll push them out to queue.git shortly so that the robots can have a go.
