Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Tue, 15 Mar 2022 11:16:26 +0100
From:   "Steinar H. Gunderson" <sesse@google.com>
To:     Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>,
        Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
        linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf intel-pt: Synthesize cycle events
Message-ID: <YjBnet2813sEGjZY@google.com>
References: <20220310093844.982656-1-sesse@google.com>
 <586de5fc-858b-2693-1986-5c77e8c0e3d0@intel.com>
 <YiuKAk7SaXP7B7Ee@google.com>
 <ba2c49da-22c5-06ea-e953-82211b953ca8@intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <ba2c49da-22c5-06ea-e953-82211b953ca8@intel.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 06:24:19PM +0200, Adrian Hunter wrote:
> Perhaps changing it something like below.  What do you think?

I think the structure looks good, but I'm not sure about updating
e.g. ptq->last_cy_insn_cnt in both functions? Does that make sense?

I ran this and found something strange: I've started getting some hits
(very small amounts, e.g. 0.14%) on instructions that are not branches.
How can that happen?

/* Steinar */