[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAM9d7cgSPbBgHL8qkmFEfbA3pNct4VPaxDwOcKZD3_5ZNL-oNQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 27 May 2015 23:59:04 +0900
From: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
To: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Sukadev Bhattiprolu <sukadev@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] perf: jevents: Program to convert JSON file to C
style file
Hi Andi,
On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 11:40 PM, Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
>> So we build tables of all models in the architecture, and choose
>> matching one when compiling perf, right? Can't we do that when
>> building the tables? IOW, why don't we check the VFM and discard
>> non-matching tables? Those non-matching tables are also needed?
>
> We build it for all cpus in an architecture, not all architectures.
> So e.g. for an x86 binary power is not included, and vice versa.
OK.
> It always includes all CPUs for a given architecture, so it's possible
> to use the perf binary on other systems than just the one it was
> build on.
So it selects one at run-time not build-time, good. But I worry about
the size of the intel tables. How large are they? Maybe we can make
it dynamic-loadable if needed..
Thanks,
Namhyung
--
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