mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Cc: "K.Prasad" <prasad@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Lai Jiangshan <laijs@cn.fujitsu.com>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca>,
	Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
Subject: Re: [Patch 0/1] HW-BKPT: Allow per-cpu kernel-space Hardware Breakpoint requests
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 11:16:42 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090826091642.GB7743@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090826033637.GB6245@nowhere>


* Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 04:28:11PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > 
> > * K.Prasad <prasad@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > > Providing those would let us build a pmu struct on top of this 
> > > > high level API, hopefully.
> > 
> > Note that there's a PMU struct already in 
> > arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_counter.c. Could debug-register ops be 
> > tacked on to it?
> 
> No, we don't need to build an arch level pmu since the BP api 
> already handles the arch abstraction (or well, it is planned to).
> 
> Instead, what we need is a core pmu that relies on the BP api. 
> Such pmu will be allocated dynamically while creating a hardware 
> breakpoint counter.

i'm not convinced at all we need all that layering of 
perfcounters->pmu->BP. Why not add BP support to the PMU abstraction 
and be done with it?

That way we get hardware breakpoints via 'pinned, exclusive, per cpu 
hw-breakpoint counters' for example and kernel/hw-breakpoint.c can 
go away altogether.

kernel/perf_counter.c already handles scheduling, conflict 
resolution, enumeration, syscall exposure and more.

Hm?

	Ingo

  reply	other threads:[~2009-08-26  9:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-08-17 12:46 K.Prasad
2009-08-19 16:11 ` K.Prasad
2009-08-19 17:33   ` Frederic Weisbecker
2009-08-20 17:27     ` K.Prasad
2009-08-21 14:28       ` Ingo Molnar
2009-08-26  3:36         ` Frederic Weisbecker
2009-08-26  9:16           ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2009-08-26 11:49             ` Frederic Weisbecker
2009-08-26 18:02               ` K.Prasad
2009-08-29 13:41                 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-09-01  6:38                   ` K.Prasad
2009-09-01 23:51                     ` Frederic Weisbecker
2009-09-03 18:28                       ` K.Prasad
2009-09-03 19:22                         ` Ingo Molnar
2009-08-25 20:33       ` K.Prasad

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=20090826091642.GB7743@elte.hu \
    --to=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
    --cc=laijs@cn.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=prasad@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=stern@rowland.harvard.edu \
    /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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®