Re: [PATCH 2/3] perf tools: allow user to specify hardwarebreakpoint bp_len

[Frederic Weisbecker]

On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 05:22:29PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 12/10, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 11:11:07AM -0500, suravee.suthikulpanit@xxxxxxx wrote:
> > > @@ -525,14 +525,11 @@ int parse_events_add_breakpoint(struct list_head *list, int *idx,
> > >  	if (parse_breakpoint_type(type, &attr))
> > >  		return -EINVAL;
> > >
> > > -	/*
> > > -	 * We should find a nice way to override the access length
> > > -	 * Provide some defaults for now
> > > -	 */
> > > -	if (attr.bp_type == HW_BREAKPOINT_X)
> > > -		attr.bp_len = sizeof(long);
> > > -	else
> > > -		attr.bp_len = HW_BREAKPOINT_LEN_4;
> > > +	/* Provide some defaults if len is not specified */
> > > +	if (!len)
> > > +		len = attr.bp_type == HW_BREAKPOINT_X ? sizeof(long) :
> > > +							HW_BREAKPOINT_LEN_4;
> >
> > Why is LEN_4 affected in the type?
> 
> Hmm, what do you mean?

I got confused (as usual) by the x = y == foo ? bar : stuff;

I suggest we avoid that kind of coding style, at least to spare repeated confused
and annoying emails from me ;-)
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/