[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1238696998.5133.44.camel@laptop>
Date: Thu, 02 Apr 2009 20:29:58 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Corey Ashford <cjashfor@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] perf_counter: add more context information
On Thu, 2009-04-02 at 20:18 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 2009-04-02 at 13:36 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > > > -#define MAX_STACK_DEPTH 255
> > > > +#define MAX_STACK_DEPTH 254
> > > >
> > > > struct perf_callchain_entry {
> > > > - u64 nr;
> > > > + u32 nr, hv, kernel, user;
> > > > u64 ip[MAX_STACK_DEPTH];
> > > > };
> >
> > Oh, and Paul suggested using u16s right after I send it out. So
> > I'll either send an update or send a incremental in case you
> > already applied it.
>
> yes, that's probably a good idea. Although u8 might be even better -
> do we ever want to do more than 256 deep stack vectors? Even those
> would take quite some time to construct and pass down.
We'd have to pad it with 4 more bytes to remain u64 aligned, also, why
restrict ourselves. That MAX_STACK_DEPTH limit is trivially fixable if
indeed someone finds its insufficient.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists