[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150709115948.GS19282@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2015 13:59:48 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@...ne.edu>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...ux.intel.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] perf: Provide status of known PMUs
On Thu, Jul 09, 2015 at 11:26:56AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Jul 09, 2015 at 10:48:00AM +0300, Adrian Hunter wrote:
> >
> > > Known PMUs may not be present for various reasons. Provide a way for the user
> > > to know what the reason is.
> >
> > Not a bad idea, but I do wonder where we should draw the line on what is
> > 'known'. The patch as proposed will have bts/pt listed as 'known' for every arch
> > out there.
> >
> > By that logic, x86 should list the ppc/sparc/mips/arm/etc.. PMUs as known and
> > wrong_arch too, which might be a tad excessive.
>
> Absolutely x86 should list them as well - from a user POV arch dependent tooling
> sucks in general. There's nothing more annoying than trying to figure out why a
> particular tool does not work.
But why would the tool care?
--
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