Re: [PATCH v1 05/10] perf evsel: Limit in group test to CPUs

[Liang, Kan]

On 2023-03-01 11:12 p.m., Ian Rogers wrote:
> Don't just match on the event name, restict based on the PMU too.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ian Rogers <irogers@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  tools/perf/arch/x86/util/evsel.c | 3 +++
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/perf/arch/x86/util/evsel.c b/tools/perf/arch/x86/util/evsel.c
> index ea3972d785d1..580b0a172136 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/arch/x86/util/evsel.c
> +++ b/tools/perf/arch/x86/util/evsel.c
> @@ -61,6 +61,9 @@ bool arch_evsel__must_be_in_group(const struct evsel *evsel)
>  	if (!evsel__sys_has_perf_metrics(evsel))
>  		return false;
>  
> +	if (evsel->pmu_name && strncmp(evsel->pmu_name, "cpu", 3))
> +		return false;

I'm not sure why we want to check the pmu name. It seems better to move
it into evsel__sys_has_perf_metrics(), since perf_metrics is a core PMU
only feature.

I think the strncmp(evsel->pmu_name, "cpu", 3) is to check whether it is
a core PMU. It is also used in other places. I think it's better to
factor out it, e.g., arch_evsel__is_core_pmu(). It will deliver a clear
message of what we are doing here.

Thanks,
Kan
> +
>  	return evsel->name &&
>  		(strcasestr(evsel->name, "slots") ||
>  		 strcasestr(evsel->name, "topdown"));