[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190528134845.GQ2623@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Tue, 28 May 2019 15:48:45 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: kan.liang@...ux.intel.com
Cc: acme@...nel.org, mingo@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
tglx@...utronix.de, jolsa@...nel.org, eranian@...gle.com,
alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com, ak@...ux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/9] perf/x86/intel: Support hardware TopDown metrics
On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 02:40:50PM -0700, kan.liang@...ux.intel.com wrote:
> diff --git a/include/linux/perf_event.h b/include/linux/perf_event.h
> index b980b9e95d2a..0d7081434d1d 100644
> --- a/include/linux/perf_event.h
> +++ b/include/linux/perf_event.h
> @@ -133,6 +133,11 @@ struct hw_perf_event {
>
> struct hw_perf_event_extra extra_reg;
> struct hw_perf_event_extra branch_reg;
> +
> + u64 saved_metric;
> + u64 saved_slots;
> + u64 last_slots;
> + u64 last_metric;
This is really sad, and I'm thinking much of that really isn't needed
anyway, due to how you're not using some of the other fields.
> };
> struct { /* software */
> struct hrtimer hrtimer;
> --
> 2.14.5
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists