On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 02:40:50PM -0700, kan.liang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
@@ -3287,6 +3304,13 @@ static int core_pmu_hw_config(struct perf_event *event)
return intel_pmu_bts_config(event);
}
+#define EVENT_CODE(e) (e->attr.config & INTEL_ARCH_EVENT_MASK)
+#define is_slots_event(e) (EVENT_CODE(e) == 0x0400)
+#define is_perf_metrics_event(e) \
+ (((EVENT_CODE(e) & 0xff) == 0xff) && \
+ (EVENT_CODE(e) >= 0x01ff) && \
+ (EVENT_CODE(e) <= 0x04ff))
+
That is horrific.. (e & INTEL_ARCH_EVENT_MASK) & 0xff is just daft,
that should be: (e & ARCH_PERFMON_EVENTSEL_EVENT).
Also, we already have fake events for event=0, see FIXED2, why are we
now using event=0xff ?