[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1276187914.2077.579.camel@twins>
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2010 18:38:34 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>,
Zhang Yanmin <yanmin_zhang@...ux.intel.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] perf: Provide a proper stop action for software
events
On Thu, 2010-06-10 at 18:29 +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> Imagine you have several software and hardware events running on the
> same cpu. Each time you reset this period for a software event, you do
> a hw_pmu_disable() / hw_pmu_enable(), which writes/read the hardware
> register for each hardware events, amongst other wasteful things.
hw_perf_disable/enable() are on their way out. They should be replaced
with a struct pmu callback. We must remove all these weak functions if
we want to support multiple pmus.
--
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