Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 11 Jun 2009 19:58:37 -0700 (PDT) | From | Linus Torvalds <> | Subject | Re: [GIT PULL] Performance Counters for Linux |
| |
On Fri, 12 Jun 2009, Al Viro wrote: > > So could you please clarify the situation? If the ABI compatibility > requirements remain the same as they used to be, whether the userland code > is in-tree or not, I'm fine with the entire thing. If they do not (and *ONLY* > in that case), I think we have a real problem.
I think the ABI requirements are the same.
That said, I also suspect that as with oprofile itself, we'll end up having expansions of the ABI that may well be CPU-specific. I also suspect that there will probably be breakage early on just because things will inevitably settle.
And I think that for something like a profiling tool, such breakage is much more acceptable than for the actual binaries you'd profile. It's not like we're talking about breaking the boot or functionality of a machine, as happens when we break the X server (which has happened).
Linus
| |