[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160111143439.GA4665@pd.tnic>
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2016 15:34:39 +0100
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...radead.org>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/5] perf: Sanitize perf directory structure, p1
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 01:39:44PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> So it is only now that I noticed that we have both 'core.c' and 'uncore.c', which
> is slightly bit confusing: the core.c's we have around the kernel denote core
> subsystem functionality - not CPU core functionality. If we have uncore.c around,
> confusion might ensue.
>
> OTOH maybe it's not a big issue and we can just live with it. I'd hate to see
> main.c. Maybe rename 'uncore.c' to 'cpu_uncore.c'? OTOH that sounds a bit silly
> too. So maybe leave it as you named them.
Well, not doung anything should be ok because the *uncore* things would
go to the <vendor>/ subdir:
I.e.,
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_amd_uncore.c
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel_uncore.c
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel_uncore.h
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel_uncore_nhmex.c
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel_uncore_snb.c
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel_uncore_snbep.c
will become
arch/x86/events/amd/uncore.c
arch/x86/events/intel/uncore.c
arch/x86/events/intel/uncore.h
arch/x86/events/intel/uncore_nhmex.c
arch/x86/events/intel/uncore_snb.c
arch/x86/events/intel/uncore_snbep.c
and core.c will be in the upper dir arch/x86/events/
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists