David, On Mon, Nov 19, 2007 at 05:08:43AM -0800, David Miller wrote: > > Instead of blabbering further about this topic, I decided to put my > code where my mouth is and spent the weekend porting the perfmon2 > kernel bits, and the user bits (libpfm and pfmon) to sparc64. >
I appreciate your effort. I am glad to see that the interface and implementation survived yet another architecture. I think at this point ARM is the only major architecture missing. In anycase, I would be happy to integrate your sparc64 patches. > As a result I've found that perfmon2 is quite nice and allows > incredibly useful and powerful tools to be written. The syscalls > aren't that bad and really I see not reason to block it's inclusion. > As I said earlier, I am not opposed to changing the syscalls. I have proposed a few schemes to address the issue of versioning. If vectors arguments are problematic, we can go with single register/call. I think there are other areas where perfmon2 could benefit from the help of the LKML developers. I will post a list shortly. > I rescind all of my earlier objections, let's merge this soon :-) Thanks. -- -Stephane - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
