Re: [PATCH 7/7] perf arm-spe: Don't hard code config attribute
From: Leo Yan <leo.yan@arm.com>
Date: 2025-12-02 12:28:38
Also in:
linux-perf-users, lkml
On Mon, Dec 01, 2025 at 04:41:10PM +0000, Coresight ML wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
Use the config attribute that's published by the driver instead of hard coding "attr.config". Signed-off-by: James Clark <james.clark@linaro.org> --- tools/perf/arch/arm64/util/arm-spe.c | 15 ++++++++------- 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)diff --git a/tools/perf/arch/arm64/util/arm-spe.c b/tools/perf/arch/arm64/util/arm-spe.c index d5ec1408d0ae..6c3dc97fde30 100644 --- a/tools/perf/arch/arm64/util/arm-spe.c +++ b/tools/perf/arch/arm64/util/arm-spe.c@@ -256,7 +256,7 @@ static __u64 arm_spe_pmu__sample_period(const struct perf_pmu *arm_spe_pmu) static void arm_spe_setup_evsel(struct evsel *evsel, struct perf_cpu_map *cpus) { - u64 bit; + u64 pa_enable_bit; evsel->core.attr.freq = 0; evsel->core.attr.sample_period = arm_spe_pmu__sample_period(evsel->pmu);@@ -288,9 +288,10 @@ static void arm_spe_setup_evsel(struct evsel *evsel, struct perf_cpu_map *cpus) * inform that the resulting output's SPE samples contain physical addresses * where applicable. */ - bit = perf_pmu__format_bits(evsel->pmu, "pa_enable"); - if (evsel->core.attr.config & bit) - evsel__set_sample_bit(evsel, PHYS_ADDR); + + if (!evsel__get_config_val(evsel->pmu, evsel, "pa_enable", &pa_enable_bit)) + if (pa_enable_bit) + evsel__set_sample_bit(evsel, PHYS_ADDR);
Hmm... I am a bit concerned for the evsel__get_config_val() usage throughout the series. evsel__get_config_val() returns a whole config value rather than the bit field specified by the format name. If other bits (but not the "pa_enable" bit) are set in the same config set, would it wrongly set the PHYS_ADDR sample bit? Seems to me, for reading specific format, perf_pmu__format_bits() is more suitable than evsel__get_config_val(). Thanks, Leo