[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170530135714.GJ24144@tassilo.jf.intel.com>
Date:   Tue, 30 May 2017 06:57:14 -0700
From:   Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Vince Weaver <vince@...ter.net>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: perf group read for inherited events
On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 11:45:12AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > Or is the simple patch below good enough?
> 
> The below seems to be the correct thing. It is rather unfortunate that
> this would break/significantly change existing semantics :/
The "existing semantics" as in ignoring the PERF_SAMPLE_READ in sample_type,
even though it wasn't implemented? It seems reasonable to me.
If you really worry about it could drop a printk_once in and see if it
triggers anywhere (and if yes drop the if completely)
The patch looks good to me. Please consider adding it.
I have some patches to use this in perf stat, will submit later.
-Andi
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
 
