* Peter Zijlstra <pet...@infradead.org> wrote:
> [...]
>
> The reason Ingo took it out was that these measured numbers would
> slightly vary from boot to boot making it hard to compare
> performance numbers across boots.
>
> There's something to be said for either case I suppose.
Yeah, so we could put the parameters back by measuring it in
user-space via a nice utility in tools/, and by matching it to
relevant hardware signatures (CPU type and cache sizes), plus doing
some defaults for when we don't have any signature... possibly based
on a fuzzy search to find the 'closest' system in the table of
constants.
That would stabilize the boot-to-boot figures while still keeping most
of the system specific-ness, in a maintainable fashion.
The downside is that we'd have to continuously maintain a table of all
this info, with new entries added when new CPUs are introduced on the
market. That's an upside too, btw.
Thanks,
Ingo
--
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/
