[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CABPqkBQS3ikJWd6yXjjSKdEW3M2pNYzTSs2d56=VTx=aomWUYg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2013 14:12:42 +0200
From: Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Jacob Shin <jacob.shin@....com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...stprotocols.net>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, x86 <x86@...nel.org>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND 0/3] perf, amd: Support for Family 16h L2I
Performance Counters
On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 1:56 PM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> * Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 2013-04-10 at 13:49 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>
>> > Hmm.. the 15h old interface bits got merged? I thought I kept telling
>> > that should be done like the intel uncore stuff since the hardware
>> > interface wasn't retarded anymore.
>>
>> Ah well, that crap seems to have slipped in in Feb when I was still a
>> near vegetable and not paying much attention.
>>
>> /me curses a bit.
>>
>> I don't suppose we can deprecate it and remove this stuff?
>
> I think we can - if there's a functional replacement.
>
Does the existing code expose a type in sysfs?
If not then you cannot do this transparently, I am afraid
because the syntax would be different, i.e., not cpu/...
I reviewed the code and tested it. But at the time, I thought
you had agreed on the approach used.
--
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