Hi James, On 17/01/2022 09:59, James Clark wrote: > > On 14/01/2022 21:21, German Gomez wrote: >> A previous commit preventing attr->sample_period values from being >> overridden in pfm events changed a related behaviour in arm_spe. >> >> Before this patch: >> perf record -c 10000 -e arm_spe_0// -- sleep 1 >> >> Would not yield an SPE event with period=10000, because the arm-spe code > Just to clarify, this seems like it should say "Would yield", not "Would not yield", > as in it was previously working? "this patch" refers to the patch I'm sending, not the one it's fixing. I might have to rewrite this to make it more clear. How about: === A previous patch preventing "attr->sample_period" values from being overridden in pfm events changed a related behaviour in arm-spe. Before said patch: perf record -c 10000 -e arm_spe_0// -- sleep 1 Would yield an SPE event with period=10000. After the patch, the period in "-c 10000" was being ignored because the arm-spe code initializes sample_period to a non-zero value. This patch restores the previous behaviour for non-libpfm4 events. === Thanks for the review, German
