Re: [PATCH 2/5] rtla: Discard trace entries with cpu >= nr_cpus

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Low] The printf format strings incorrectly use `%lld` to print `unsigned long long` variables.
--

--- Patch [2]: [PATCH 2/5] rtla: Discard trace entries with cpu >= nr_cpus ---

commit 2e2ceb9161355aea34f26cdf4de0da20e2aa2e3d
Author: Tomas Glozar [off-list ref]

rtla: Discard trace entries with cpu >= nr_cpus

This commit adds a bounds check to rtla to discard trace entries when the
CPU index exceeds the known number of CPUs. It introduces an invalid_events
counter and updates the tool's output to report when such events occur.

[ ... ]

+void
+osnoise_report_invalid_events(struct osnoise_tool *tool)
+{
+	unsigned long long total_events;
+
+	if (tool->trace.invalid_events > 0) {
+		if (tool->trace.missed_events != UINT64_MAX) {
+			total_events = tool->trace.processed_events + tool->trace.invalid_events +
+				tool->trace.missed_events;
+
+			printf("%lld (%.2f%%) invalid events, results might not be accurate\n",
+				tool->trace.invalid_events,
+				(double) tool->trace.invalid_events / total_events * 100.0);

[Severity: Low]
Since invalid_events is declared as an unsigned long long in struct
trace_instance, should this printf format string use %llu instead of %lld?
If the value were to somehow exceed LLONG_MAX, it would print as a negative
number.

+		} else {
+			printf("%lld invalid events, results might not be accurate\n",
+				tool->trace.invalid_events);

[Severity: Low]
Does this format string also need to be updated to %llu to match the
unsigned long long type of invalid_events?

+		}
+	}
+}

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260814135511.2207190-1-tglozar@redhat.com?part=2