Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2009 19:33:12 +0200
From: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Rob van der Heij <rvdheij@gmail.com>,
       Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
       john stultz <johnstul@us.ibm.com>, Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 0/2] NOHZ vs. profile/oprofile v2
Message-ID: <20090610193312.37b944f3@skybook>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.00.0906092252150.3351@localhost.localdomain>
References: <20090603152223.083010123@de.ibm.com>
	<alpine.LFD.2.00.0906092252150.3351@localhost.localdomain>
Organization: IBM Corporation
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 953
Lines: 26

On Tue, 9 Jun 2009 22:52:51 +0200 (CEST)
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote:

> On Wed, 3 Jun 2009, Martin Schwidefsky wrote:
> 
> > Greetings,
> > version 2 of the profile patches. The only change is the in_interrupt()
> > fix in tick_nohz_stop_idle(). I would like to know how to proceed with
> > the issue.
> > Andy, do you still prefer to handle the old style profiler analog to
> > the oprofile patch? If yes I would drop patch #1 and extend patch #2
> > with another tick_nohz_disable().
> 
> Any update on this one ?

I haven't heard anything from any Andy in regard to patch #1. We could
do patch #2 now and decide later what we want to do with the old style
profiler.

blue skies,
  Martin.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/