From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Avi Kivity Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 2/9] KVM: Expose a version 2 architectural PMU to a guests Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2011 17:40:00 +0200 Message-ID: <4EB7FBD0.7060803@redhat.com> References: <1320323618-10375-1-git-send-email-gleb@redhat.com> <1320323618-10375-3-git-send-email-gleb@redhat.com> <1320675725.18053.40.camel@twins> <20111107153439.GG8670@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Peter Zijlstra , kvm@vger.kernel.org, mtosatti@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@elte.hu, acme@ghostprotocols.net, Frederic Weisbecker To: Gleb Natapov Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20111107153439.GG8670@redhat.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On 11/07/2011 05:34 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote: > On Mon, Nov 07, 2011 at 03:22:05PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Thu, 2011-11-03 at 14:33 +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote: > > > @@ -35,6 +35,7 @@ config KVM > > > select KVM_MMIO > > > select TASKSTATS > > > select TASK_DELAY_ACCT > > > + select PERF_EVENTS > > > > Do you really want to make that an unconditional part of KVM? I know we > > can't currently build x86 without perf due to that hw breakpoint > > trainwreck, but people were actually wanting to solve that. > > > I am fine either way (the only thing is that I can't check that I can > build kvm without pmu right now). But I doubt that there will be many > KVM deployment without perf enabled and making it optional will increase > test matrix. KVM has pretty extensive list of selects already for that > reason. I let maintainers to decide on this. I prefer to avoid the select, when possible. But that can be done after PERF_EVENTS is disentangled from x86. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function