Hi Frederic, Thanks for including me on CC. On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 05:08:45PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 06:42:35PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote: > > The perf_event overflow handler does not receive any caller-derived > > argument, so many callers need to resort to looking up the perf_event > > in their local data structure. This is ugly and doesn't scale if a > > single callback services many perf_events. > > > > Fix by adding a context parameter to perf_event_create_kernel_counter() > > (and derived hardware breakpoints APIs) and storing it in the perf_event. > > The field can be accessed from the callback as event->overflow_handler_context. > > All callers are updated. > > > > Signed-off-by: Avi Kivity <avi@xxxxxxxxxx> > > I believe it can micro-optimize ptrace through register_user_hw_breakpoint() because > we could store the index of the breakpoint that way, instead of iterating through 4 slots. > > Perhaps it can help in arm too, adding Will in Cc. Yes, we could store the breakpoint index in there and it would save us walking over the breakpoints when one fires. Not sure this helps us for anything else though. My main gripe with the ptrace interface to hw_breakpoints is that we have to convert all the breakpoint information from ARM_BREAKPOINT_* to HW_BREAKPOINT_* and then convert it all back again in the hw_breakpoint code. Yuck! Will -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
