[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2016 08:35:04 +0100 (CET)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Vikas Shivappa <vikas.shivappa@...ux.intel.com>
cc: vikas.shivappa@...el.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
x86@...nel.org, hpa@...or.com, mingo@...nel.org,
peterz@...radead.org, ravi.v.shankar@...el.com,
tony.luck@...el.com, fenghua.yu@...el.com, h.peter.anvin@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] x86/mbm: Intel Memory B/W Monitoring enumeration
and init
On Wed, 2 Mar 2016, Vikas Shivappa wrote:
> + if (cqm_enabled && mbm_enabled)
> + intel_cqm_events_group.attrs = intel_cmt_mbm_events_attr;
> + else if (!cqm_enabled && mbm_enabled)
> + intel_cqm_events_group.attrs = intel_mbm_events_attr;
> + else if (cqm_enabled && !mbm_enabled)
> + intel_cqm_events_group.attrs = intel_cqm_events_attr;
> +
> ret = perf_pmu_register(&intel_cqm_pmu, "intel_cqm", -1);
> if (ret) {
> pr_err("Intel CQM perf registration failed: %d\n", ret);
> goto out;
So what cleans up mbm_local and mbm_total in that case?
Thanks,
tglx
Powered by blists - more mailing lists