[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20091016071046.GD20388@elte.hu>
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 09:10:46 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf tools: Add a new generic section in perf.data
* Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com> wrote:
> +/*
> + * Version 0: contains trace_info section only
> + */
> +struct perf_file_additionals {
> + u64 version;
> + struct perf_file_section trace_info;
> +};
i dont disagree with the change - but it would be even nicer to simply
define a features bitmask, instead of a flat version - and add the
trace_info section as a feature.
That way it's all a lot more manageable: we dont know about versions per
se, we know about features. Individual features could be developed (and
backported) in a distributed way - without having to worry about a flat
version model.
So i'd suggest something like a bitmask in the perf.data file header:
DECLARE_BITMAP(features, 256);
Plus every perf version knows about the features it supports:
DECLARE_BITMAP(features_supported, 256);
The compatibility rule is: perf only touches attributes that belong to
features it knows about.
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