Re: [PATCH RFC 05/21] perf auxtrace: Do not mix up mmap idx

[Adrian Hunter]

On 28/04/22 00:54, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 22, 2022 at 9:24 AM Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> The idx is with respect to evlist not evsel. That hasn't mattered because
>> they are the same at present. Prepare for that not being the case, which it
>> won't be when sideband tracking events are allowed on all CPUs even when
>> auxtrace is limited to selected CPUs.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@xxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>>  tools/perf/util/auxtrace.c | 10 ++++++++--
>>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/auxtrace.c b/tools/perf/util/auxtrace.c
>> index 10936a38031f..2d015b0be549 100644
>> --- a/tools/perf/util/auxtrace.c
>> +++ b/tools/perf/util/auxtrace.c
>> @@ -640,8 +640,14 @@ static int evlist__enable_event_idx(struct evlist *evlist, struct evsel *evsel,
>>  {
>>         bool per_cpu_mmaps = !perf_cpu_map__empty(evlist->core.user_requested_cpus);
>>
>> -       if (per_cpu_mmaps)
>> -               return perf_evsel__enable_cpu(&evsel->core, idx);
>> +       if (per_cpu_mmaps) {
>> +               struct perf_cpu evlist_cpu = perf_cpu_map__cpu(evlist->core.all_cpus, idx);
>> +               int cpu = perf_cpu_map__idx(evsel->core.cpus, evlist_cpu);
> 
> While it can be thought of as an index from the function name,
> it'd be nice if we could be explicit like cpu_map_idx.

Ok

> 
> Thanks,
> Namhyung
> 
>> +
>> +               if (cpu == -1)
>> +                       return -EINVAL;
>> +               return perf_evsel__enable_cpu(&evsel->core, cpu);
>> +       }
>>
>>         return perf_evsel__enable_thread(&evsel->core, idx);
>>  }
>> --
>> 2.25.1
>>