linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/4] perf/x86/uncore: modularize Intel uncore driver

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 19 Mar 2014 13:55:55 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	"Yan, Zheng" <zheng.z.yan@...el.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	acme@...radead.org, eranian@...gle.com, andi@...stfloor.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] perf/x86/uncore: modularize Intel uncore driver


* Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 12:53:23PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > >
> > > Ah; but do you want this config option hidden in the "Processor 
> > > type and features" menu or would they be better in "General 
> > > setup/Kernel Performance Events and Counters" ?
> > 
> > What's your preference? There's a vali argument for both: the 
> > uncore driver is part of the CPU, but it's also a perf driver.
> 
> My initial thought was having it in the perf menu because that's 
> relatively easy to find and not big and cluttered (yet) like the 
> arch menu is.
> 
> I actually had to double check I had the right patches applied 
> because I couldn't find it the first time.

Okay, agreed, lets do it that way. It's also the better choice UI 
wise: arguably people will associate this driver with 'perf', not with 
CPU features.

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
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/