mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Lin Ming <ming.m.lin@intel.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
	"eranian@gmail.com" <eranian@gmail.com>,
	"Gary.Mohr@Bull.com" <Gary.Mohr@bull.com>,
	Corey Ashford <cjashfor@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	arjan@linux.intel.com, "Zhang,
	Yanmin" <yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.com>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: [RFC][PATCH 0/4] perf: remove __weak function hw_perf_group_sched_in()
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2010 15:50:55 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1271922655.30535.106.camel@minggr.sh.intel.com> (raw)

Hi, all

>From the discussion of thread "[RFC] perf_events: support for uncore
a.k.a. nest units", in order to support multiple hw pmu, Peter suggested
the first thing that needs to be done is get rid of all the __weak
functions (with exception of perf_callchain*, since that really is arch
specific), includes 

hw_perf_group_sched_in
hw_perf_event_init
hw_perf_disable
hw_perf_enable

Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
> One thing not on that list, which should happen first I guess, is to
> remove hw_perf_group_sched_in(). The idea is to add some sort of
> transactional API to the struct pmu, so that we can delay the
> schedulability check until commit time (and roll back when it fails).
>
> Something as simple as:
>
>  struct pmu {
>    void start_txn(struct pmu *);
>    void commit_txn(struct pmu *);
>
>    ,,,
>  };
>
> and then change group_sched_in() to use this instead of
> hw_perf_group_sched_in(), whose implementations mostly replicate
> group_sched_in() in various buggy ways anyway.
>

This patch series is to remove hw_perf_group_sched_in() first.

patch 1: core, add group scheduling transactional APIs
patch 2: x86, implement group scheduling transactional APIs
patch 3: powerpc, implement group scheduling transactional APIs
patch 4: sparc, implement group scheduling transactional APIs

Thanks for any comment.

Lin Ming


             reply	other threads:[~2010-04-22  7:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-04-22  7:50 Lin Ming [this message]
2010-04-22  8:29 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-04-23  2:23   ` Lin Ming

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1271922655.30535.106.camel@minggr.sh.intel.com \
    --to=ming.m.lin@intel.com \
    --cc=Gary.Mohr@bull.com \
    --cc=arjan@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=cjashfor@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=eranian@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=paulus@samba.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

Powered by JetHome