> Obviously, that does not fit into the VFM field. We could either > add a new PVR field to the mapfile: > > [vfm, version, type, pvr] > > or, as the patch currently does, let architectures intepret the > "version" field as they see fit? > > IOW, leave it to architectures to keep arch_pmu_events_match_cpu() > consistent with _their_ mapfile?
version is the version number of the event file. This way you can't signify the version number if you ever change something. If you need something else in vfm to identify the CPU can't you just add it there? I wouldn't really call it vfm, it's really a "abstract cpu identifier per architecture". So if you need pvr just add it there. -Andi -- a...@linux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
