From: "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@intel.com>
To: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
CC: "peterz@infradead.org" <peterz@infradead.org>,
        "mingo@redhat.com" <mingo@redhat.com>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "jolsa@redhat.com" <jolsa@redhat.com>,
        "acme@kernel.org" <acme@kernel.org>,
        "eranian@google.com" <eranian@google.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH V3] perf/x86/intel/uncore: remove nonexistent clockticks
 event for client uncore
Thread-Topic: [PATCH V3] perf/x86/intel/uncore: remove nonexistent
 clockticks event for client uncore
Thread-Index: AQHS+lLNk0brg6uFIUK4YMVwtL0mnqJOOOmAgACGyRA=
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2017 15:43:53 +0000
Message-ID: <37D7C6CF3E00A74B8858931C1DB2F0775371882F@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com>
References: <20170711143346.2396-1-kan.liang@intel.com>
 <20170711152449.GB3441@tassilo.jf.intel.com>
In-Reply-To: <20170711152449.GB3441@tassilo.jf.intel.com>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
dlp-product: dlpe-windows
dlp-version: 10.0.102.7
dlp-reaction: no-action
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 748
Lines: 24

> 
> > User observable change with the patch.
> > clockticks event is removed from CBOX. User may need to change their
> > script to use uncore_clock/clockticks/ instead.
> 
> I don't think we can do that and break everyone's scripts. Have to keep the
> old behavior, even though it is not ideal.
> 
> Or you fix the the uncore subsystem to support a separate attribute array for
> the first cbox.
> 

I once had a patch to only support clockticks for first box. 
https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/12/1/477
But Peter think it's better to move it to its own PMU.
https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/12/1/484

Each solution has its own advantage and drawback. I'm OK for either of them.
I'm not sure what others prefer.

Peter? Ingo? What do you think?

Thanks,
Kan