Kevin Hilman wrote: > Kevin Hilman <khilman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > [...] > >> PMC code is ARM generic and already largely exists in other places >> (oprofile for one.) So the use of the PMC will need to be generalized >> as well as be shown not to interfere with other users (as raised >> already by Jean Pihet.) > > Someone is already trying to generalize a PMC interface. You might want > to follow this thread: > > http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2009-December/005898.html > I tried to find the code in LO but I think it is not yet present. So with that in mind may I propose that the pmc functions we introduce in plat-omap will be present as __init code (so that we ensure no one uses it after the system finishes booting up) as long as the pmc infrastructure is not available for non-Oprofile uses? As I mentioned in an earlier thread, the pmc is used and stopped very early during the kernel boot and AFAICT there should not be any problem (probably we need to check its behavior on EMU/HS devices). Thanks, -Romit -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
