linux-kernel - Re: PATCH [0/4] perf: clean-up of power events API

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]

Message-ID: <20101019115200.GC25371@elte.hu>
Date:	Tue, 19 Oct 2010 13:52:00 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	Thomas Renninger <trenn@...e.de>,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Pierre Tardy <tardyp@...il.com>,
	Jean Pihet <jean.pihet@...oldbits.com>,
	linux-trace-users@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-pm@...ts.linux-foundation.org, rjw@...k.pl,
	linux-omap@...r.kernel.org,
	Kevin Hilman <khilman@...prootsystems.com>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Frank Eigler <fche@...hat.com>,
	Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: PATCH [0/4] perf: clean-up of power events API


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

> On Tue, 2010-10-19 at 13:45 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > 
> > * Thomas Renninger <trenn@...e.de> wrote:
> > 
> > > > Most definitely. It's no accident that it took such a long time for this issue 
> > > > to be raised in the first place. It's a rare occurance -
> > >
> > > Do you agree that this occurance happened now and these events should get cleaned 
> > > up before ARM and other archs make use of the broken interface?
> > >
> > > If not, discussing this further, is a big waste of time... and Jean would have to 
> > > try to adapt his ARM code on the broken ABI...
> > 
> > The discussion seems to have died down somewhat. Please re-send to lkml the latest 
> > patches you have to remind everyone of the latest state of things - the merge window 
> > is getting near.
> > 
> > My only compatibility/ABI point is basically that it shouldnt break _existing_ 
> > tracepoints (and users thereof). If your latest bits meet that then it ought to be a 
> > good first step. You are free to (and encouraged to) introduce more complete sets of 
> > events.
> 
> Can we deprecate and eventually remove the old ones, or will we be forever obliged 
> to carry the old ones too?

We most definitely want to deprecate and remove the old ones - but we want to give 
instrumentation software some migration time for that.

Jean, Arjan, what would be a feasible and practical deprecation period for that? One 
kernel cycle?

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/