On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 8:42 PM, Andi Kleen <a...@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>> +
>> +struct attribute *nhm_events_attrs[] = {
>> + EVENT_PTR(CPU_CYCLES),
>> + EVENT_PTR(INSTRUCTIONS),
>> + EVENT_PTR(CACHE_REFERENCES),
>> + EVENT_PTR(CACHE_MISSES),
>> + EVENT_PTR(BRANCH_INSTRUCTIONS),
>> + EVENT_PTR(BRANCH_MISSES),
>> + EVENT_PTR(BUS_CYCLES),
>> + EVENT_PTR(STALLED_CYCLES_FRONTEND),
>> + EVENT_PTR(STALLED_CYCLES_BACKEND),
>> + EVENT_PTR(REF_CPU_CYCLES),
>> + EVENT_PTR(mem_ld_nhm),
>> + NULL,
>> +};
>
> I thought Jiri's patch already exports all the generic ones?
>
> Why do you need to replace the whole table?
>
Because I am extending them with one or two events based on cpu
model. That was the easiest way of doing this instead of playing
some kind of malloc+copy trick.
> BTW I still think my approach in the v4 Haswell patchkit
> is simpler and didn't rely on hardcoding these events.
>
I don't care about those events. As I found out, they are not even
used by perf because they are all hardcoded and that's what gets
used. I assume they are exposed for reference only. I don't object
to that. But I think the right mechanism would be one where you
can add events at boot time based on CPU model. It could be used
to add the common events as well in the common part of the init
code.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
