[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20121019170538.GB28183@us.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 10:05:39 -0700
From: Sukadev Bhattiprolu <sukadev@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
Cc: Robert Richter <robert.richter@....com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Anton Blanchard <anton@....ibm.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
linuxppc-dev@...abs.org, Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
mpjohn@...ibm.com, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Arun Sharma <asharma@...com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] perf: Add a few generic stalled-cycles events
Stephane Eranian [eranian@...gle.com] wrote:
| So all in all, I think this is not a very good idea. You have to put
| this into the tool or a library that auto-detects the
| host CPU and programs the right set of events.
|
| We've had that discussion many times. Just reiterating my personal
| opinion on this.
Yes that would work too. One drawback is that the hardware events
will be in the tool, while the software/tracepoint events in the
kernel sysfs representation.
Or is that the reason we want all events in one place (sysfs) ?
Sukadev
--
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