Hi John, On 08/12/2021 11:51, John Garry wrote: > On 07/12/2021 18:06, German Gomez wrote: >> tools/perf/arch/arm/include/perf_regs.h | 42 -- >> tools/perf/arch/arm64/include/perf_regs.h | 76 -- >> tools/perf/arch/csky/include/perf_regs.h | 82 --- >> tools/perf/arch/mips/include/perf_regs.h | 69 -- >> tools/perf/arch/powerpc/include/perf_regs.h | 66 -- >> tools/perf/arch/riscv/include/perf_regs.h | 74 -- >> tools/perf/arch/s390/include/perf_regs.h | 78 -- >> tools/perf/arch/x86/include/perf_regs.h | 82 --- >> tools/perf/builtin-script.c | 18 +- >> tools/perf/util/perf_regs.c | 666 ++++++++++++++++++ >> tools/perf/util/perf_regs.h | 10 +- >> .../scripting-engines/trace-event-python.c | 10 +- >> tools/perf/util/session.c | 25 +- >> 13 files changed, 697 insertions(+), 601 deletions(-) > > Did you consider leaving the register structures where they are while > renaming to include the arch name and then having as externs or similar? I see an example of that idea for arm64_unwind_libunwind_ops. > If by register structures you are referring to "__perf_reg_name(int)", I can't leave them where they are. Only one of them would be included in the build. I think the idea from arm64_unwind_libunwind_ops makes more sense in that case because perf might not link against libunwind-arm64. In the case of registers, we always have this info available in /tools/. Thanks, German > Cheers, > John