From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: peterz@infradead.org (Peter Zijlstra) Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 15:01:20 +0100 Subject: [PATCH/RFC v1 0/2] Human readable performance event description in sysfs In-Reply-To: <20100120135553.GA22897@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <1263978706-15499-1-git-send-email-t.fujak@samsung.com> <1263978999.4283.823.camel@laptop> <20100120133145.GE4089@wear.picochip.com> <1263994779.4283.1057.camel@laptop> <20100120135553.GA22897@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Message-ID: <1263996080.4283.1064.camel@laptop> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Wed, 2010-01-20 at 13:55 +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > Unfortunately, it isn't. CPU identification has become a fairly murky > business on ARM that the information exported from /proc/cpuinfo can > no longer precisely identify the CPU itself. > > For example, we just treat Cortex A8 and A9 as "ARMv7" because from the > kernel's point of view, they're the same. Would it make sense to extend arm's cpuinfo to include enough information so that userspace can indeed do this? It seems to me userspace might care about the exact platform they're running on. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753515Ab0ATOCA (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Jan 2010 09:02:00 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752472Ab0ATOB6 (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Jan 2010 09:01:58 -0500 Received: from casper.infradead.org ([85.118.1.10]:55417 "EHLO casper.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752517Ab0ATOB6 (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Jan 2010 09:01:58 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC v1 0/2] Human readable performance event description in sysfs From: Peter Zijlstra To: Russell King - ARM Linux Cc: Jamie Iles , jpihet@mvista.com, p.osciak@samsung.com, will.deacon@arm.com, =?UTF-8?Q?Micha=C5=82?= Nazarewicz , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kyungmin.park@samsung.com, mingo@elte.hu, m.szyprowski@samsung.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Tomasz Fujak In-Reply-To: <20100120135553.GA22897@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <1263978706-15499-1-git-send-email-t.fujak@samsung.com> <1263978999.4283.823.camel@laptop> <20100120133145.GE4089@wear.picochip.com> <1263994779.4283.1057.camel@laptop> <20100120135553.GA22897@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 15:01:20 +0100 Message-ID: <1263996080.4283.1064.camel@laptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.28.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2010-01-20 at 13:55 +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > Unfortunately, it isn't. CPU identification has become a fairly murky > business on ARM that the information exported from /proc/cpuinfo can > no longer precisely identify the CPU itself. > > For example, we just treat Cortex A8 and A9 as "ARMv7" because from the > kernel's point of view, they're the same. Would it make sense to extend arm's cpuinfo to include enough information so that userspace can indeed do this? It seems to me userspace might care about the exact platform they're running on.