[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110316135308.GA1774@nowhere>
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2011 14:53:15 +0100
From: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Hitoshi Mitake <mitake@....info.waseda.ac.jp>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] perf: Custom contexts
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 11:32:54PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> Right, so I don't much like the interface, two new ioctl()s and a flag
> of dubious use.
Do you think we need a new syscall for this new feature.
> How important is this recursive nature of the thing to you:
>
> > It's supposed to support infinite combinations with starter having starters
> > themselves, plus filters, etc...
>
> We've so far avoided recursion like that, we only have single level
> groups etc.
There is actually no recursivity of any sort that the kernel has to handle.
The starter/stopper links are never handled recursively. ie: there is no
loop walking through the entire chain of starter to starter to starter, etc...
It's always only handled between direct related event: starter and target, but
never further.
Only the final effect has recursion properties in the resulting count
or trace.
--
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