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;
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf list: Skip the invalid hybrid pmu
To:     Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>
Cc:     acme@kernel.org, jolsa@kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org,
        mingo@redhat.com, alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com,
        Linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ak@linux.intel.com,
        kan.liang@intel.com, yao.jin@intel.com
References: <20210610051646.4003-1-yao.jin@linux.intel.com>
 <YOS1119y56eH0Uyv@krava>
From:   "Jin, Yao" <yao.jin@linux.intel.com>
Message-ID: <ff0c48bb-2cbf-766a-f726-bb7a287375b4@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Wed, 7 Jul 2021 15:24:23 +0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.11.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <YOS1119y56eH0Uyv@krava>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

Hi Jiri,

On 7/7/2021 3:58 AM, Jiri Olsa wrote:
>> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/pmu.c b/tools/perf/util/pmu.c
>> index 88c8ecdc60b0..281670e9c4bd 100644
>> --- a/tools/perf/util/pmu.c
>> +++ b/tools/perf/util/pmu.c
>> @@ -1604,6 +1604,9 @@ void print_pmu_events(const char *event_glob, bool name_only, bool quiet_flag,
>>   	pmu = NULL;
>>   	j = 0;
>>   	while ((pmu = perf_pmu__scan(pmu)) != NULL) {
>> +		if (perf_pmu__is_invalid_hybrid(pmu->name))
>> +			continue;
> hum why not detect it in pmu_lookup early on
> and not add that pmu at all?
> 
> thanks,
> jirka
> 

Yes, it's a good idea that detects it in pmu_lookup, thanks!

Thanks
Jin Yao