[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090609065350.GB16707@elte.hu>
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2009 08:53:50 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...stprotocols.net>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Corey Ashford <cjashfor@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf_counter: extensible perf_counter_attr
* Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org> wrote:
> Peter Zijlstra writes:
>
> > Allow extending the perf_counter_attr structure by linking extended
> > structures to it.
>
> ...
>
> > @@ -175,6 +175,13 @@ struct perf_counter_attr {
> > __u32 __reserved_3;
> >
> > __u64 __reserved_4;
> > +
> > + struct perf_counter_attr_ext *ext_attrs;
> > +};
>
> Since this is a user-visible structure, you've just introduced an
> ABI difference between 32-bit and 64-bit processes, which we've
> managed to avoid so far. [...]
This is a good point too - handling pointers in ABIs is possible but
should be avoided as much as possible: it creates the need to
introduce a compat_sys_perf_counter_open() and doubles the syscall
table complexity.
Lets do the s/__reserved_1/attr_size ABI i suggested (i outlined
various properties of it in the previous mail). Agreed?
Ingo
--
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