linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ia64 support for tools/perf/

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 18 Nov 2009 20:39:27 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ia64 support for tools/perf/


* Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:

> On Tue, 2009-11-17 at 09:25 -0800, Luck, Tony wrote:
> > > Btw., are you planning HAVE_PERF_EVENTS support for IA64? (It's nice 
> > > stuff, i can only recommend it! ;-)
> > 
> > My first goal is getting the s/w events hooked up and working.  I'm 
> > still wondering about how to get the h/w counters to co-exist with 
> > perfmon (which has been part of ia64 API for many years).
> 
> A first approach could be to make them mutually exclusive at runtime. 
> When there's a perf_event user, perfmon users get FAIL and vs.
> 
> This is basically the state for x86 perf_event vs oprofile atm.

Yep, this is probably the least intrusive approach. Mixing the 
implementations beyond trivial exclusion would probably be pain.

	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/