[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1277829250.1868.46.camel@laptop>
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2010 18:34:10 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Cc: paulus <paulus@...ba.org>,
stephane eranian <eranian@...glemail.com>,
Robert Richter <robert.richter@....com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Paul Mundt <lethal@...ux-sh.org>,
Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>,
Lin Ming <ming.m.lin@...el.com>,
Yanmin <yanmin_zhang@...ux.intel.com>,
Deng-Cheng Zhu <dengcheng.zhu@...il.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 09/11] perf: Default PMU ops
On Tue, 2010-06-29 at 17:03 +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > You mean, if (!pmu->start_txn && pmu->pmu_enable) { /* install defaults
> > */ } ?
>
>
> Not really. pmu_*able and txn are there for different purposes.
> A pmu implementation may want to provide enable/disable things
> but not require any txn. Or one may just not need any of those,
> like software events.
>
> It should simply map to a nop if nothing is provided.
Thing is, using at least the pmu_enable/disable fallback when no txn
methods are provided can save bunch of hardware writes. So this trivial
fallback makes sense.
--
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