* John Stultz <john.stu...@linaro.org> wrote:
> > AFAIK Stephane is not proposing this patch for
> > inclusion but rather it is an unfortunate necessary
> > evil. The module exposes perf_clock (ie., local_clock)
> > to userspace and allows in this case the generation of
> > samples with a perf timestamp which is required for
> > proper sorting.
> >
> > I understand this solution is not liked, but it works,
> > requires no kernel modifications to achieve the end
> > goal and can be used for kernels going back to at least
> > 2.6.38 (perhaps earlier, have not checked).
>
> Yep. And I'm sympathetic to the fact that an alternative
> solution hasn't made it upstream yet. I'm hopeful Pawel's
> recent approach will make it in (it seems like it hasn't
> raised any flags w/ scheduler folks - but I've not always
> been able to follow the discussion closely).
So if it's part of this series and reviews fine then I'll
be happy to apply it! Nothing better than having a kernel
patch and an actual usecase go hand in hand.
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/
