Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 21 Aug 2009 16:28:11 +0200 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [Patch 0/1] HW-BKPT: Allow per-cpu kernel-space Hardware Breakpoint requests |
| |
* 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?
> > All that would be a benefit in both sides. It avoids us building > > a low level PMU that reinvent the wheel, ie: the hardware > > breakpoints API handles a lot of things both in arch and core > > sides (debug register setting tricks with dr7 and co, cpu > > hotplug, kexec, etc...). In the bp API it brings more power > > (register switching only if needed, per cpu support, clone > > inheritance support, etc...) > > > > And in the end we have a pmu (which unifies the control of this > > profiling unit through a well established and known object for > > perfcounter) controlled by a high level API that could also > > benefit to other debugging subsystems. > > > > What do you think? It would be also nice to have Peter's and > > Ingo opinion about it, to be sure we are not going in the wrong > > direction. > > Indeed, it will be nice to know from Ingo and Peter that we are > heading right.
If you do this proper perfcounters integration then i'm certainly happy.
Ingo
| |