Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755819Ab0FNJXb (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Jun 2010 05:23:31 -0400 Received: from cam-admin0.cambridge.arm.com ([217.140.96.50]:52131 "EHLO cam-admin0.cambridge.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755822Ab0FNJXa (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Jun 2010 05:23:30 -0400 Subject: Re: perf_disable() From: Will Deacon To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: paulus , stephane eranian , Robert Richter , Paul Mundt , LKML In-Reply-To: <1276273784.2077.2055.camel@twins> References: <1276273784.2077.2055.camel@twins> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 10:23:11 +0100 Message-ID: <1276507391.5601.2.camel@e102144-lin.cambridge.arm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.28.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Jun 2010 09:23:16.0081 (UTC) FILETIME=[3835B610:01CB0BA3] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 716 Lines: 25 Hi Peter, On Fri, 2010-06-11 at 17:29 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > Hi, > > I've been going over perf_disable() usage in kernel/perf_event.c and > wondered if we actually need it at all. -------->8-------- > If nobody else known about/can find anything, I'm going to mostly remove > perf_disable() for now and later think about how to optimize the > hardware writes again. No objections from the ARM camp as we don't use perf_disable() for anything anyway. Will -- 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/