On Jul 10, 2007, at 11:33 AM, Richard Lowe wrote: > Alexander Kolbasov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> Richard Lowe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > .....many sage observations from both elided...
> Ah, it was using a web of symlinks to cross branches that I was > missing. > >> I do not quite see how kstats can be used to represent trees. >> What do >> you have in mind here? > > I think what I had in mind falls apart for PGs. > My expectation was that the basic method used now to represented > core/chip > relationships could be expanded upon, but I don't think that holds up > to even moderately complex topologies. Is the desire to leverage kstat primarily a desire to NOT have two different mechanisms? If so, and if there becomes consensus that the pseudo filesystem is most appropriate (due to it's flexibility) wouldn't an obvious unification be to re-implement kstat to use the pseudo filesystem in lieu of it's current APIs for backwards compatibility ... while providing unification? Keith H. Bierman [EMAIL PROTECTED] | [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Microsystems Microelectronics Group | sun IM: khb AIM: kbiermank 5430 Nassau Circle East | 650-352-4432 voice+fax Cherry Hills Village, CO 80113 | sun internal 68207 http://blogs.sun.com/khb | 303-997-2749 <speaking for myself, not Sun*> Copyright 2007 _______________________________________________ perf-discuss mailing list [email protected]
