Re: [PATCH 1/3] perf vendor-events: Fix all remaining invalid JSON files
From: John Garry
Date: Thu Oct 07 2021 - 13:19:59 EST
On 07/10/2021 12:05, James Clark wrote:
Remove trailing commas. A later commit will make the parser more strict
and these will not be valid anymore.
Signed-off-by: James Clark<james.clark@xxxxxxx>
---
.../arch/arm64/ampere/emag/bus.json | 2 +-
.../arch/arm64/ampere/emag/cache.json | 20 +++++++++----------
.../arch/arm64/ampere/emag/clock.json | 2 +-
.../arch/arm64/ampere/emag/exception.json | 4 ++--
.../arch/arm64/ampere/emag/instruction.json | 10 +++++-----
.../arch/arm64/ampere/emag/memory.json | 4 ++--
.../arch/arm64/hisilicon/hip08/metrics.json | 2 +-
.../pmu-events/arch/nds32/n13/atcpmu.json | 2 +-
.../pmu-events/arch/s390/cf_z10/basic.json | 2 +-
.../pmu-events/arch/s390/cf_z10/crypto.json | 2 +-
.../pmu-events/arch/s390/cf_z10/extended.json | 2 +-
.../pmu-events/arch/s390/cf_z13/basic.json | 2 +-
.../pmu-events/arch/s390/cf_z13/crypto.json | 2 +-
.../pmu-events/arch/s390/cf_z13/extended.json | 2 +-
.../pmu-events/arch/s390/cf_z14/basic.json | 2 +-
.../pmu-events/arch/s390/cf_z14/crypto.json | 2 +-
.../pmu-events/arch/s390/cf_z14/extended.json | 2 +-
.../pmu-events/arch/s390/cf_z15/basic.json | 2 +-
.../pmu-events/arch/s390/cf_z15/crypto.json | 2 +-
.../pmu-events/arch/s390/cf_z15/crypto6.json | 2 +-
.../pmu-events/arch/s390/cf_z15/extended.json | 2 +-
.../pmu-events/arch/s390/cf_z196/basic.json | 2 +-
.../pmu-events/arch/s390/cf_z196/crypto.json | 2 +-
.../arch/s390/cf_z196/extended.json | 2 +-
.../pmu-events/arch/s390/cf_zec12/basic.json | 2 +-
.../pmu-events/arch/s390/cf_zec12/crypto.json | 2 +-
.../arch/s390/cf_zec12/extended.json | 2 +-
.../arch/test/test_soc/cpu/uncore.json | 2 +-
.../arch/x86/icelakex/icx-metrics.json | 2 +-
This seems fine. But, as mentioned earlier, I do worry that some of
these JSONs are copied from some downstream repositories, and now they
will go out of sync. That could cause problems, so need to check with
respective owners.
Apart from that caveat, it seems ok:
Reviewed-by: John Garry <john.garry@xxxxxxxxxx>