On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 10:51:37AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Matt Fleming <matt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 09:13:32AM +0200, Marc Titinger wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > I'm just being curious : do these patches change the way those chips > > > should be supported, that do not have a PMU-like IP, but implement > > > PC-sampling thanks to a general purpose timer (not the system timer) > > > ? > > > > CPUs that do not have a PMU are not required to use the perf-events > > oprofile backend, it is entirely optional. The pc-sampling timer in > > oprofile is not affected by this series. > > It should still work fine though: a generalized oprofile backend should > simply use hrtimer based events. That also has a chance to be higher > quality than the system time fallback, on PMU-less (but high-res-timer > capable) systems. Yeah, that's a good point. It would make a nice addition to this patch series. I may get chance to take a look at it at some point. -- 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
