RE: [PATCH v5 0/4] perf vendor events: Support PMU events for A64FX

[nakamura.shun@xxxxxxxxxxx]

Hi, John

> > > Apart from that, I think that we're a bit uncertain about patch 3/4
> > What are your concerns?
> > I think it's okay for perf to read a new event code with a number at the
> beginning.
> 
> The impact of this fix is on {name} and later rules.
> parse_events.l uses {name} only in one place.
> The only rule defined after {name} is {name_tag}.
> 
> I think the point of current fix is that the rules defined after {name} are not
> misrecognize and the syntax is not broken.
> {name_tag} starts with ', but {name} does not contain'.
> Therefore, the corrected {name} does not misrecognize the {name_tag}, and I
> think there is no problem.
Do you have any advice?

Best Regards
Shunsuke