# Re: \[PATCH V2 0/6\] perf: New conditional branch filter

- From: Anshuman Khandual \<hidden\>
- Date: 2013-09-10 03:53:51 
- List: linuxppc-dev
- Page: https://ratatoskr.run/linuxppc-dev/2013/09/4114050
- Thread: https://ratatoskr.run/lkml/2013/08/4109232/t.md

```text
On 09/10/2013 07:36 AM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-08-30 at 09:54 +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
>> 	This patchset is the re-spin of the original branch stack sampling
>> patchset which introduced new PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_COND filter. This patchset
>> also enables SW based branch filtering support for PPC64 platforms which have
>> branch stack sampling support. With this new enablement, the branch filter support
>> for PPC64 platforms have been extended to include all these combinations discussed
>> below with a sample test application program.
> 
> ...
> 
>> Mixed filters
>> -------------
>> (6) perf record -e branch-misses:u -j any_call,any_ret ./cprog
>> Error:
>> The perf.data file has no samples!
>>
>> NOTE: As expected. The HW filters all the branches which are calls and SW tries to find return
>> branches in that given set. Both the filters are mutually exclussive, so obviously no samples
>> found in the end profile.
> 
> The semantics of multiple filters is not clear to me. It could be an OR,
> or an AND. You have implemented AND, does that match existing behaviour
> on x86 for example?

I believe it does match. X86 code drops the branch records (originally captured
in the LBR) while applying the SW filters.

Regards
Anshuman
```