From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 16 Oct 2002 20:51:44 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 16 Oct 2002 20:51:44 -0400 Received: from probity.mcc.ac.uk ([130.88.200.94]:22539 "EHLO probity.mcc.ac.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 16 Oct 2002 20:51:43 -0400 Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2002 01:57:28 +0100 From: John Levon To: "David S. Miller" Cc: weigand@immd1.informatik.uni-erlangen.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] [8/7] oprofile - dcookies need to use u32 Message-ID: <20021017005728.GA8267@compsoc.man.ac.uk> References: <200210160156.DAA25005@faui11.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <20021015.190019.41374479.davem@redhat.com> <20021016164057.GB85246@compsoc.man.ac.uk> <20021016.143843.99745166.davem@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20021016.143843.99745166.davem@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.25i X-Url: http://www.movementarian.org/ X-Record: Mr. Scruff - Trouser Jazz X-Scanner: exiscan *181yye-000Pro-00*giYBAGckR.U* (Manchester Computing, University of Manchester) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Oct 16, 2002 at 02:38:43PM -0700, David S. Miller wrote: > I don't understand why using a bigger type is not an option. > > Why not just use u64? That would work too. The oprofile event buffer is unsigned long [], and stores cookie values. Surely that would require us to use u64 there too, doubling the buffer sizes on 32-bit machines ? I suppose we could do so magic to spread the cookie value across two buffer entries if necessary, but that's ugly... regards john -- "It's a cardboard universe ... and if you lean too hard against it, you fall through." - Philip K. Dick