Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753673AbdF2Pjj (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Jun 2017 11:39:39 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:45448 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753284AbdF2Pjf (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Jun 2017 11:39:35 -0400 DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mx1.redhat.com AF260FEF14 Authentication-Results: ext-mx09.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: ext-mx09.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=jolsa@redhat.com DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mx1.redhat.com AF260FEF14 Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2017 17:39:32 +0200 From: Jiri Olsa To: "Liang, Kan" Cc: "acme@kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "mingo@redhat.com" , "peterz@infradead.org" , "Hunter, Adrian" , "alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com" , "ak@linux.intel.com" Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf tools: set no branch type for dummy event in PT Message-ID: <20170629153932.GA2924@krava> References: <20170628143153.29643-1-kan.liang@intel.com> <20170629152912.GB1463@krava> <37D7C6CF3E00A74B8858931C1DB2F0775371415B@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <37D7C6CF3E00A74B8858931C1DB2F0775371415B@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.8.3 (2017-05-23) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.38]); Thu, 29 Jun 2017 15:39:34 +0000 (UTC) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 776 Lines: 29 On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 03:31:45PM +0000, Liang, Kan wrote: SNIP > > > static int intel_pt_recording_options(struct auxtrace_record *itr, > > > struct perf_evlist *evlist, > > > struct record_opts *opts) > > > @@ -701,6 +717,8 @@ static int intel_pt_recording_options(struct > > auxtrace_record *itr, > > > perf_evsel__set_sample_bit(switch_evsel, > > TIME); > > > perf_evsel__set_sample_bit(switch_evsel, > > CPU); > > > > > > + add_no_lbr_config_term(&switch_evsel- > > >config_terms); > > > + > > > > hum, why can't you change the sample bit directly? with: > > > > perf_evsel__reset_sample_bit(switch_evsel, > > BRANCH_STACK); > > It will be overwrite in perf_evsel__config. > where? you set the evsel->no_aux_samples jirka