On Thu, 2014-27-02 at 21:04:55 UTC, Cody P Schafer wrote:
> Add PMU_FORMAT_RANGE() and PMU_FORMAT_RANGE_RESERVED() (for reserved
> areas) which generate functions to extract the relevent bits from
> event->attr.config{,1,2} for use by sw-like pmus where the
> 'config{,1,2}' values don't map directly to hardware registers.
>
> Signed-off-by: Cody P Schafer <c...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> ---
> include/linux/perf_event.h | 17 +++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/perf_event.h b/include/linux/perf_event.h
> index e56b07f..3da5081 100644
> --- a/include/linux/perf_event.h
> +++ b/include/linux/perf_event.h
> @@ -871,4 +871,21 @@ _name##_show(struct device *dev,
> \
> \
> static struct device_attribute format_attr_##_name = __ATTR_RO(_name)
>
> +#define PMU_FORMAT_RANGE(name, attr_var, bit_start, bit_end) \
> +PMU_FORMAT_ATTR(name, #attr_var ":" #bit_start "-" #bit_end);
> \
> +PMU_FORMAT_RANGE_RESERVED(name, attr_var, bit_start, bit_end)
I really think these should have event in the name.
Someone looking at the code is going to see event_get_foo() and wonder where
that is defined. Grep won't find a definition, tags won't find a definition,
the least you can do is have the macro name give some hint.
> +#define PMU_FORMAT_RANGE_RESERVED(name, attr_var, bit_start, bit_end)
> \
It doesn't generate a format attribute.
> +static u64 event_get_##name##_max(void)
> \
> +{ \
> + int bits = (bit_end) - (bit_start) + 1; \
> + return ((0x1ULL << (bits - 1ULL)) - 1ULL) | \
> + (0xFULL << (bits - 4ULL)); \
What's wrong with:
(0x1ULL << ((bit_end) - (bit_start) + 1)) - 1ULL;
cheers
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
