Re: [PATCH V3 13/23] perf/x86/intel/lbr: Factor out intel_pmu_store_lbr

[Peter Zijlstra]

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/tip-b16a5b52eb90d92b597257778e51e1fdc6423e64@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > 
> > > 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.