[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170901123119.bbkdcpui3vh6zrvb@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2017 14:31:19 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Alexey Budankov <alexey.budankov@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
Kan Liang <kan.liang@...el.com>,
Dmitri Prokhorov <Dmitry.Prohorov@...el.com>,
Valery Cherepennikov <valery.cherepennikov@...el.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
David Carrillo-Cisneros <davidcc@...gle.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Vince Weaver <vince@...ter.net>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] perf: Rewrite enabled/running timekeeping
On Fri, Sep 01, 2017 at 01:45:17PM +0300, Alexey Budankov wrote:
> Well, this looks like an "opposite" approach to event timekeeping in
> comparison to what we currently have.
I would say 'sane' approach. The current thing is horrible.
> Do you want this rework before or after the current patch set?
Before I would think, because the whole point of the rb-tree thing is to
not touch all events all the time. And you can only do that after you
fix that timekeeping.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists