Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20200515215733.20647-1-eranian@google.com> <20200515215733.20647-4-eranian@google.com>
 <20200518093402.GB277222@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
In-Reply-To: <20200518093402.GB277222@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
From:   Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>
Date:   Mon, 18 May 2020 13:16:41 -0700
Message-ID: <CABPqkBQt0a7Pi7X2cLz601TJEqasDXrOZcwuBhDCjcZ+ishPMw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] perf/x86/rapl: add AMD Fam17h RAPL support
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, mingo@elte.hu,
        Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>,
        "Phillips, Kim" <kim.phillips@amd.com>,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, May 18, 2020 at 2:34 AM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 02:57:33PM -0700, Stephane Eranian wrote:
>
> > +static struct perf_msr amd_rapl_msrs[] = {
> > +     [PERF_RAPL_PP0]  = { 0, &rapl_events_cores_group, NULL},
> > +     [PERF_RAPL_PKG]  = { MSR_AMD_PKG_ENERGY_STATUS,  &rapl_events_pkg_group,   test_msr },
> > +     [PERF_RAPL_RAM]  = { 0, &rapl_events_ram_group,   NULL},
> > +     [PERF_RAPL_PP1]  = { 0, &rapl_events_gpu_group,   NULL},
> > +     [PERF_RAPL_PSYS] = { 0, &rapl_events_psys_group,  NULL},
> > +};
>
> Why have those !PKG things initialized? Wouldn't they default to 0
> anyway? If not, surely { 0, } is sufficient.

Yes, but that assumes that perf_msr_probe() is fixed to not expect a grp.
I think it is best to fix perf_msr_probe(). I already fixed one
problem, I'll fix this one as well.