From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752238Ab2HAMp2 (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Aug 2012 08:45:28 -0400 Received: from mail-gg0-f174.google.com ([209.85.161.174]:65230 "EHLO mail-gg0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750737Ab2HAMp1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Aug 2012 08:45:27 -0400 Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2012 14:45:19 +0200 From: Frederic Weisbecker To: Steven Rostedt Cc: Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar , LKML , Alessio Igor Bogani , Andrew Morton , Avi Kivity , Chris Metcalf , Christoph Lameter , Geoff Levand , Gilad Ben Yossef , Hakan Akkan , "H. Peter Anvin" , Kevin Hilman , Max Krasnyansky , "Paul E. McKenney" , Stephen Hemminger , Sven-Thorsten Dietrich , Thomas Gleixner Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] user_hooks: New user hooks subsystem Message-ID: <20120801124513.GB28650@somewhere.redhat.com> References: <1343403634-31555-1-git-send-email-fweisbec@gmail.com> <1343403634-31555-2-git-send-email-fweisbec@gmail.com> <1343660892.20897.3.camel@twins> <20120730155059.GB17078@somewhere.redhat.com> <20120731070640.GA2950@gmail.com> <20120731104845.GC17078@somewhere.redhat.com> <20120731145742.GA6934@gmail.com> <1343751262.20897.29.camel@twins> <20120801122821.GA28650@somewhere.redhat.com> <1343824983.27983.74.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1343824983.27983.74.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Aug 01, 2012 at 08:43:03AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Wed, 2012-08-01 at 14:28 +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 06:14:22PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > So we probably need to generalize a bit more. Some naming based on > > "code domain"? > > > > struct code_domain { > > int is_tracking; > > enum { > > in_kernel, > > in_user, > > in_guest > > } state; > > } > > Is there a fundamental difference between 'in_user' and 'in_guest' > though? Probably not from RCU POV. But the cputime is not accounted the same.