On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 12:45:51AM +0200, Robert Richter wrote: > On 27.09.10 18:26:27, Matt Fleming wrote: > > > > I don't see why we should pollute the perf namespace with a function > > that is only being used inside the SH oprofile code? There would be > > exactly one use of this function and I doubt the perf guys will want > > this function exposed. In it's current state, it really is no use to any > > architecture other than SH. > > > > We can always add a generic perf_pmu_name() function later if needed, > > but it's definitely not needed at the moment. > > Ok, so then let's implement sh_pmu_name() in > arch/sh/oprofile/common.c, we import asm/perf_event.h to get access to > struct sh_pmu. This could be implemented as a static function then and > we also get rid of this interface thing. That seems OK to me s'long as Paul (the author of the perf events code for SH) doesn't have a problem with us exposing the struct sh_pmu * outside of arch/sh/kernel/perf_event.c -- 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
