[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1290764510.24565.6.camel@e102144-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2010 09:41:50 +0000
From: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Lin Ming <ming.m.lin@...el.com>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
"robert.richter" <robert.richter@....com>,
Corey Ashford <cjashfor@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
fweisbec <fweisbec@...il.com>, paulus <paulus@...ba.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>,
Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@...y.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Kyle Moffett <kyle@...fetthome.net>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, davem <davem@...emloft.net>,
Michael Cree <mcree@...on.net.nz>,
Deng-Cheng Zhu <dengcheng.zhu@...il.com>,
Paul Mundt <lethal@...ux-sh.org>,
Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com>,
Jason Wessel <jason.wessel@...driver.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/8] perf, arch: Use early_initcall() for all arch
pmu implementations
On Thu, 2010-11-25 at 17:55 +0000, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> So the perf_event_init() site is _waaay_ to early to init stuff.. I
> guess I'll move it all to early_initcall() and I'll move the watchdog to
> an explicit call right after it.
>
> Something like the below,.. now I guess the question to all of you is,
> can your arch pmu code cope with early_initcall() or does it need to be
> some other place?
>
The ARM init code basically just parses the CPUID to work out what PMU
is available, so it should be safe to call it as early as you like.
Will
--
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