Hi Athira,

On 02/12/2021 16:03, Athira Rajeev wrote:

quoted

On 01-Dec-2021, at 6:03 PM, German Gomez [off-list ref] wrote:

Include a "struct machine*" parameter to the process_event callback in
the scripting layer. This will allow access to the perf_env from within
this callback.

Followup patches will build on top of this to report the correct name of
the registers in a perf.data file, consistently with the architecture
the file was recorded in.

Signed-off-by: German Gomez <redacted>
---
tools/perf/builtin-script.c                   |  2 +-
.../util/scripting-engines/trace-event-perl.c |  3 ++-
.../scripting-engines/trace-event-python.c    | 23 +++++++++++--------
tools/perf/util/trace-event-scripting.c       |  3 ++-
tools/perf/util/trace-event.h                 |  3 ++-
5 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)

diff --git a/tools/perf/builtin-script.c b/tools/perf/builtin-script.c
index 9434367af..711132f0b 100644
--- a/tools/perf/builtin-script.c
+++ b/tools/perf/builtin-script.c

@@ -2256,7 +2256,7 @@ static int process_sample_event(struct perf_tool *tool,

				thread__resolve(al.thread, &addr_al, sample);
			addr_al_ptr = &addr_al;
		}
-		scripting_ops->process_event(event, sample, evsel, &al, addr_al_ptr);
+		scripting_ops->process_event(event, sample, evsel, &al, addr_al_ptr, machine);

Hi,

Looks like the patch is using “machine” to allow access to perf_env__arch and there by to get the “arch” value.
But can we use from evsel, like  "perf_env__arch(evsel__env(evsel))” to get arch value instead of including new parameter for “struct machine” ?

Thanks
Athira

Thanks for the suggestion. It looks like we can skip this patch if we
can get the arch value that way.

Thanks!
German


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel