On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 3:34 AM Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Feb 01, 2023 at 03:12:43PM -0800, Atish Patra wrote:
> > This patch only adds barebone structure of perf implementation. Most of
> > the function returns zero at this point and will be implemented
> > fully in the future.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Atish Patra <atishp@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > +/* Per virtual pmu counter data */
> > +struct kvm_pmc {
> > + u8 idx;
> > + struct perf_event *perf_event;
> > + uint64_t counter_val;
>
> CI also complained that here, and elsewhere, you used uint64_t rather
> than u64. Am I missing a reason for not using the regular types?
>
Nope. It was a simple oversight. I will fix it.
Do you have a link to the CI report so that I can address them all in v5 ?
> Thanks,
> Conor.
>
> > + union sbi_pmu_ctr_info cinfo;
> > + /* Event monitoring status */
> > + bool started;
--
Regards,
Atish
