Re: [patch 0/3] [Announcement] Performance Counters for Linux

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Sat, 2008-12-06 at 11:05 +1100, Paul Mackerras wrote:
> Now, the tables in perfmon's user-land libpfm that describe the
> mapping from abstract events to event-selector values and the
> constraints on what events can be counted together come to nearly
> 29,000 lines of code just for the IBM 64-bit powerpc processors.
> 
> Your API condemns us to adding all that bloat to the kernel, plus the
> code to use those tables.

Since you need those tables and that code anyway, and in a solid
reliable way, what is the objection of carrying it in the kernel?

Furthermore, is there a good technical reason these cpus are so
complicated to use?

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [Kernel Newbies]     [x86 Platform Driver]     [Netdev]     [Linux Wireless]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux Filesystems]     [Yosemite Discussion]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux