[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090821142514.GE11098@elte.hu>
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2009 16:25:14 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: William Cohen <wcohen@...hat.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add minimal support for software performance counters
for ia64
* William Cohen <wcohen@...hat.com> wrote:
> Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Wed, 2009-08-19 at 15:04 -0400, William Cohen wrote:
> >> Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >>> On Wed, 2009-08-19 at 12:04 -0400, William Cohen wrote:
> >>>> +#ifdef __ia64__
> >>>> +#include "../../arch/ia64/include/asm/unistd.h"
> >>>> +#define rmb() asm volatile("" ::: "memory")
> >>>> +#define cpu_relax() asm volatile("" ::: "memory");
> >>>> +#endif
> >>> Surely the itanic has a real memory barrier? The kernel seems to use
> >>> something along the lines of mf.
> >>>
> >>> Also, cpu_relax() seems to end up being asm volatile("hint @pause" :::
> >>> "memory"), although we don't seem to have an actual user of cpu_relax()
> >>> in perf atm.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >> Peter, thanks for the comment. I took a look at the rmb() and cpu_relax() code
> >> in the kernel and revised the patch with the appropriate defines
> >
> > Looks good now, thanks!
> >
>
> When looking through the patch today I realized the new
> perf_counter.h was placed in include/asm-ia64. It should be placed
> in arch/ia64/include/asm/perf_counter.h.
mind sending out a v2 patch with all review feedback folded in, for
IA64 maintainers to ack if they like it?
Thanks,
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