Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 4 Sep 2009 10:22:12 -0400 | From | Dave Jones <> | Subject | Re: [RFC][PATCH 10/14] x86: generic aperf/mperf code. |
| |
On Fri, Sep 04, 2009 at 11:27:19AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Fri, 2009-09-04 at 11:25 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Fri, 2009-09-04 at 11:19 +0200, Thomas Renninger wrote: > > > You still use struct perf_pair split/hi/lo members in #ifdef __i386__ > > > case which you deleted above. > > > > > > shift_count = fls(h); > > > > > > > > - cur.aperf.whole >>= shift_count; > > > > - cur.mperf.whole >>= shift_count; > > > > + cur.aperf >>= shift_count; > > > > + cur.mperf >>= shift_count; > > > > } > > > > > > > > if (((unsigned long)(-1) / 100) < cur.aperf.split.lo) { > > > Same here, possibly still elsewhere. > > > Is this only x86_64 compile tested? > > > > Of course, who still has 32bit only hardware anyway ;-) > > > > Will fix, thanks for spotting that. > > Hrmm, on that, does it really make sense to maintain the i386 code path? > > How frequently is that code called and what i386 only chips support > aperf/mperf, atom?
any 64-bit cpu that supports it can have a 32bit kernel installed on it. (and a significant number of users actually do this).
Dave
| |