[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150709124257.GU19282@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2015 14:42:57 +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 02:32:05PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> perf record error: The 'bts' PMU is not available, because the CPU does not support it
This one makes sense.
> perf record error: The 'bts' PMU is not available, because this architecture does not support it
> perf record error: The 'bts' PMU is not available, because its driver is not built into the kernel
>
> Because if it's the wrong architecture or CPU, I look for a box with the right
> one, if it's simply the kernel not having the necessary PMU driver then I'll boot
> a kernel with it enabled.
These not so much; why won't a generic: "Unknown PMU, check arch/kernel"
do?
The thing is, I hate that hard-coded list, its pain I don't need.
--
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