On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 05:24:37PM -0400, Vince Weaver wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Jun 2013, Dave Jones wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 12:33:23AM -0400, Vince Weaver wrote:
> >
> > > @@ -80,7 +519,7 @@ static int random_event_type(void)
> > >
> > > int type;
> > >
> > > - switch (rand() % 6) {
> > > + switch (rand() % 8) {
> > > case 0:
> > > type = PERF_TYPE_HARDWARE;
> > > break;
> > > @@ -99,6 +538,9 @@ static int random_event_type(void)
> > > case 5:
> > > type = PERF_TYPE_BREAKPOINT;
> > > break;
> > > + case 6:
> > > + type = PERF_TYPE_READ_FROM_SYSFS;
> > > + break;
> > > default:
> > > type = rand();
> > > break;
> >
> > is 8 correct here ? not 7 ?
>
> If you pick 7 then the default case never gets called, correct?
> I think that's a minor bug in the existing implementation, the default
> case was never called.
ah, yeah, I see.
> Perhaps proper coding convention would be to have the
> make-the-type-field-completely-random case be an explicit value and use
> the default case only for error handling.
yeah, that's what I've done in a lot of other places (actually BUG() in those cases).
For the most part they're present just to shut up -Wswitch-default, which
has caught a few cases in the past where I've missed an option.
> I should also maybe have the completely-random case be
> "completely radom but with preference to values < 256" as that's more
> likely to trigger actual valid types.
ok, I'll apply what you sent so far. (and hold off on running it through Lindent for now,
you really don't like whitespace huh? ;)
Dave
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe trinity" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
