[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110712100354.GC29812@8bytes.org>
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2011 12:03:54 +0200
From: Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
"acme@...stprotocols.net" <acme@...stprotocols.net>,
Jason Wessel <jason.wessel@...driver.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] perf: add context field to perf_event
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 12:55:25PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> Have a helper kernel thread do it for you. Or extend use_mm() to return
> the old mm (without dropping its refcount) and add a way to restore it.
Making use_mm usable for regular tasks too sounds like a good idea.
Thanks.
> Regarding LWP - I thought the intent was self-profiling by the process
> for jits and the like? If you also use it for perf, won't it be
> unusable for that? Also, can't the process interfere, from userspace,
> by executing the unprivileged LWP instructions?
Ingo made perf-integration a merge-requirement for LWP. It is not really
well-suited for being integrated into perf because the design goal was
easy and efficient self-profiling of tasks (like you stated). So
integrating it into perf causes some pain. But lets see how it works
out.
Joerg
--
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