Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755621AbZJAHZc (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Oct 2009 03:25:32 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755597AbZJAHZc (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Oct 2009 03:25:32 -0400 Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:50720 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755543AbZJAHZb (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Oct 2009 03:25:31 -0400 Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 09:25:18 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Arjan van de Ven Cc: prasad@linux.vnet.ibm.com, "Frank Ch. Eigler" , peterz@infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Frederic Weisbecker Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] perf_core: provide a kernel-internal interface to get to performance counters Message-ID: <20091001072518.GA1502@elte.hu> References: <20090925122556.2f8bd939@infradead.org> <20090926183246.GA4141@in.ibm.com> <20090926204848.0b2b48d2@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090926204848.0b2b48d2@infradead.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-ELTE-SpamScore: -1.5 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-1.5 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.5 -1.5 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0028] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1465 Lines: 35 * Arjan van de Ven wrote: > On Sun, 27 Sep 2009 00:02:46 +0530 > "K.Prasad" wrote: > > > On Sat, Sep 26, 2009 at 12:03:28PM -0400, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote: > > > > For what it's worth, this sort of thing also looks useful from > > > systemtap's point of view. > > > > Wouldn't SystemTap be another user that desires support for > > multiple/all CPU perf-counters (apart from hw-breakpoints as a > > potential user)? As Arjan pointed out, perf's present design would > > support only a per-CPU or per-task counter; not both. > > I'm sorry but I think I am missing your point. "all cpu counters" > would be one small helper wrapper away, a helper I'm sure the > SystemTap people are happy to submit as part of their patch series > when they submit SystemTap to the kernel. Yes, and Frederic wrote that wrapper already for the hw-breakpoints patches. It's a non-issue and does not affect the design - we can always gang up an array of per cpu perf events, it's a straightforward use of the existing design. User-space tools have been doing this for ages already, 'perf top' will open an array of per cpu events to monitor all events in the system. Ingo -- 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/