Re: [PATCH 4/7] perf record: Record dropped sample count

[Jiri Olsa]

On Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 01:32:14PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> Em Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 05:23:05PM +0100, Jiri Olsa escreveu:
> > On Mon, Feb 13, 2023 at 09:04:49PM -0800, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> > 
> > SNIP
> > 
> > > @@ -1929,12 +1923,27 @@ static void record__read_lost_samples(struct record *rec)
> > >  
> > >  		for (int x = 0; x < xyarray__max_x(xy); x++) {
> > >  			for (int y = 0; y < xyarray__max_y(xy); y++) {
> > > -				__record__read_lost_samples(rec, evsel, lost, x, y);
> > > +				struct perf_counts_values count;
> > > +
> > > +				if (perf_evsel__read(&evsel->core, x, y, &count) < 0) {
> > > +					pr_err("read LOST count failed\n");
> > > +					goto out;
> > > +				}
> > > +
> > > +				if (count.lost) {
> > > +					__record__save_lost_samples(rec, evsel, lost,
> > > +								    x, y, count.lost, 0);
> > > +				}
> > >  			}
> > >  		}
> > > +
> > > +		lost_count = perf_bpf_filter__lost_count(evsel);
> > > +		if (lost_count)
> > > +			__record__save_lost_samples(rec, evsel, lost, 0, 0, lost_count,
> > > +						    PERF_RECORD_MISC_LOST_SAMPLES_BPF);
> > 
> > hi,
> > I can't see PERF_RECORD_MISC_LOST_SAMPLES_BPF in the tip/perf/core so can't compile,
> > what do I miss?
> 
> Humm, but you shouldn't need kernel headers to build tools/perf/, right?

right, should be also in tools/include headers

jirka