On Fri, Oct 21, 2022, Like Xu wrote:
> On 6/10/2022 6:44 am, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 19, 2022, Like Xu wrote:
> > > @@ -142,12 +148,22 @@ static void global_disable(pmu_counter_t *cnt)
> > > ~(1ull << cnt->idx));
> > > }
> > > +static inline uint32_t get_gp_counter_msr(unsigned int i)
> >
> > Rather than helpers, what about macros? The problem with "get" is that it sounds
> > like the helper is actually reading the counter/MSR. E.g. see MSR_IA32_MCx_CTL()
> >
> > Something like this?
> >
> > MSR_PERF_GP_CTRx()
>
> The base address msr is different for intel and amd (including K7), and
> using different macros in the same location sounds like it would require a
> helper.
I wasn't thinking different macros, I was thinking a macro that consumes the
gp_counter_base.
But actually, there's no need to use a macro, it's really just the naming
convention that I think we should use. It obviously violates the preferred style,
but in this case I think the deviation is a net postive.
static inline uint32_t MSR_PERF_GP_CTRx(unsigned int i)
{
return gp_counter_base + i;
}
