From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756715Ab3A1QKq (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Jan 2013 11:10:46 -0500 Received: from one.firstfloor.org ([213.235.205.2]:54508 "EHLO one.firstfloor.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751882Ab3A1QKo (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Jan 2013 11:10:44 -0500 Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 17:10:38 +0100 From: Andi Kleen To: Stephane Eranian Cc: Andi Kleen , Ingo Molnar , LKML , Peter Zijlstra , Andrew Morton , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Jiri Olsa , Namhyung Kim , Andi Kleen Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/12] perf, x86: Add PEBSv2 record support Message-ID: <20130128161038.GR30577@one.firstfloor.org> References: <1359151245-13179-1-git-send-email-andi@firstfloor.org> <1359151245-13179-2-git-send-email-andi@firstfloor.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > I think you should call this: PEBS v3 and not v2. v2 is the version number in the enumeration register. It would be confusing to use a different numbering than Intel does. That's also the numbering that is printed in dmesg. > We already have 2 existing formats: core and nhm. > You're adding the hsw format. > > So either you add it as struct pebs_record_hsw or you > cleanup the naming of all the structs and call them: core is v0. > > struct pebs_record_v1 /* core */ > struct pebs_record_v2 /* nhm, snb, ivb */ > struct pebs_record_v3 /* hsw */ > > That would seem more consistent to me. I personally don't see a lot of need for a rename, but I can send a followon patch to rename nhm to v1 and core to v0. I will do that separately because people are already complaining that the patchkit is too big, and it doesn't really affect the functionality. -Andi