> Thanks to David, Dan and Phil for their comments.
Another note on the urgency of standardizing Perfmon:
Anarchy is not a good breeding ground for tools that need a
stable infrastructure to mature. Being "there" is what made
PAPI and perfctr popular and somewhat standard infrastructure.
Compilers, tools, JVMs... -you name it- are all moving
fast towards using hardware counters to get feedback,
tune, monitor or measure application behavior.
The PMU is becoming a standard commodity. Once Perfmon is
"the" Linux interface, all the tools can align on it and
coexist, push their R&D forward, and more importantly become
fully productized for businesses usage. Hopefully Perfmon's
interface is powerful enough to support future needs.
Good luck Stephane :)
Cheers,
Dan-
"Truong, Dan" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> The PMU is becoming a standard commodity. Once Perfmon is
> "the" Linux interface, all the tools can align on it and
> coexist, push their R&D forward, and more importantly become
> fully productized for businesses usage.
>
The apparently-extreme flexibility of the perfmon interfaces would tend to
militate against that, actually. It'd become better productised if it had
one interface and stuck to it.
(I haven't processed Stephane's reply yet - will get there)