[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110623095439.GC10238@sun>
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2011 13:54:40 +0400
From: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>
To: Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Lin Ming <ming.m.lin@...el.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Vince Weaver <vweaver1@...s.utk.edu>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC -tip] perf, x86: Add PERF_COUNT_HW_NMI_WATCHDOG event v2
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 11:40:39AM +0200, Stephane Eranian wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 8:48 AM, Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 01:21:34PM +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> > ...
> >> Note that I've not tested it but rather need approval/rejecting
> >> on idea in general.
> >
> > The final version is below. Stephane, note that it's almost the
> > same idea as you proposed except it uses explicit namings to
> > mark out that watchdog cycles are special.
> >
> This looks okay.
>
> The only alternative I see (This is wha I had in mind at the
> beginning) that would
> not require this new hidden generic event would be to have watchdog.c invoke an
> arch-specific callback to fill out the attr.type, attr->config fields directly:
>
...
>
> No new hidden event, just a x86_pmu + a per-arch callbacks.
Looks quite good for me, Don? (i'll cook some draft patch for review meanwhile).
Cyrill
--
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