[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1210181339510.28924@vincent-weaver-1.um.maine.edu>
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 13:54:47 -0400 (EDT)
From: Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@...ne.edu>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...stprotocols.net>,
eranian@...il.com,
"Meadows, Lawrence F" <lawrence.f.meadows@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] perf_event: enable overflow interrupts on KNC
On Wed, 17 Oct 2012, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > Since the knc pmu driver closely models the p6 one, it was
> > straightforward to use it as a basis for the forward port.
> > Everything _should_ work but I've only compile tested.
>
> Ok. As long as it's all identical I'd still be inclined to
> include it in v3.7, to reduce version skew. If the v3.7-rc1
> kernel won't even boot it's not like we'll be able to further
> regress it.
yes, it definitely shouldn't cause any regressions, and in fact the
version in 3.7-rc1 might not work properly without patch2 in this
set applied due to the cpuc->enabled problem that it took us a while to
track down.
I looked into getting a 3.7 kernel up and going on the KNC board, but
the diff between Intel's release and stock 2.6.34.11 has 70k
lines. Much of that is kdb, but there's also a lot of low-level
changes too, some of it due to the fact that KNC is 64-bit x86 but has no
support for SSE (so you need to handle that properly or none of your
userspace will run).
Thanks,
Vince Weaver
vincent.weaver@...ne.edu
--
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