On Thu, Aug 01, 2024 at 04:58:16AM +0000, Mingwei Zhang wrote:
> @@ -3299,9 +3309,6 @@ ctx_sched_out(struct perf_event_context *ctx, enum event_type_t event_type)
> struct perf_cpu_context *cpuctx = this_cpu_ptr(&perf_cpu_context);
> struct perf_event_pmu_context *pmu_ctx;
> int is_active = ctx->is_active;
> - bool cgroup = event_type & EVENT_CGROUP;
> -
> - event_type &= ~EVENT_CGROUP;
>
> lockdep_assert_held(&ctx->lock);
>
> @@ -3336,7 +3343,7 @@ ctx_sched_out(struct perf_event_context *ctx, enum event_type_t event_type)
> barrier();
> }
>
> - ctx->is_active &= ~event_type;
> + ctx->is_active &= ~(event_type & ~EVENT_FLAGS);
> if (!(ctx->is_active & EVENT_ALL))
> ctx->is_active = 0;
>
> @@ -3912,9 +3919,6 @@ ctx_sched_in(struct perf_event_context *ctx, enum event_type_t event_type)
> {
> struct perf_cpu_context *cpuctx = this_cpu_ptr(&perf_cpu_context);
> int is_active = ctx->is_active;
> - bool cgroup = event_type & EVENT_CGROUP;
> -
> - event_type &= ~EVENT_CGROUP;
>
> lockdep_assert_held(&ctx->lock);
>
> @@ -3932,7 +3936,7 @@ ctx_sched_in(struct perf_event_context *ctx, enum event_type_t event_type)
> barrier();
> }
>
> - ctx->is_active |= (event_type | EVENT_TIME);
> + ctx->is_active |= ((event_type & ~EVENT_FLAGS) | EVENT_TIME);
> if (ctx->task) {
> if (!is_active)
> cpuctx->task_ctx = ctx;
Would it make sense to do something like:
enum event_type_t active_type = event_type & ~EVENT_FLAGS;
ctx->is_active &= ~active_type;
and
ctx->is_active |= (active_type | EVENT_TIME);
Or something along those lines; those expressions become a little
unwieldy otherwise.
