On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 09:33:06PM -0600, Kumar Gala wrote:
> Other than splitting the patch did you have any other changes you
> wanted to see before we'd get an Ack. I'd like to see this go in
> for .34.
I thought it was a bit ugly having two different definitions of struct
power_pmu in perf_ev
On Feb 11, 2010, at 10:56 AM, Scott Wood wrote:
> Paul Mackerras wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 06:06:10PM -0600, Scott Wood wrote:
>>> Paul Mackerras wrote:
> Some limitations:
> - No threshold support -- need to figure out how to represent it in
> the event struct from userspace.
On Feb 10, 2010, at 6:06 PM, Scott Wood wrote:
>>>
>>> --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/Makefile
>>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/Makefile
>>> @@ -98,7 +98,10 @@ obj64-$(CONFIG_AUDIT)+= compat_audit.o
>>> obj-$(CONFIG_DYNAMIC_FTRACE) += ftrace.o
>>> obj-$(CONFIG_FUNCTION_GRAPH_TRACER) +
Paul Mackerras wrote:
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 06:06:10PM -0600, Scott Wood wrote:
Paul Mackerras wrote:
Some limitations:
- No threshold support -- need to figure out how to represent it in
the event struct from userspace.
What does "threshold support" mean in this context? Does it mean
som
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 06:06:10PM -0600, Scott Wood wrote:
> Paul Mackerras wrote:
> >>Some limitations:
> >>- No threshold support -- need to figure out how to represent it in
> >> the event struct from userspace.
> >
> >What does "threshold support" mean in this context? Does it mean
> >somet
Paul Mackerras wrote:
Some limitations:
- No threshold support -- need to figure out how to represent it in
the event struct from userspace.
What does "threshold support" mean in this context? Does it mean
something different from getting an interrupt after N events have been
counted? Or do
On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 03:43:51PM -0600, Scott Wood wrote:
> This implements perf_event support for the Freescale embedded performance
> monitor, based on the existing perf_event.c that supports server/classic
> chips. Eventually we may want to factor out some of the common bits.
Cool! I agree
