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
next prev parent 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®