From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: robert.richter@amd.com (Robert Richter) Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2010 17:50:26 +0200 Subject: [PATCH 2/7] perf: New helper function for pmu name In-Reply-To: <20101006133041.GA29273@linux-sh.org> References: <59a8e68894a2e755232189abbe9b1a3b892e309c.1286222593.git.matt@console-pimps.org> <20101006122736.GL13563@erda.amd.com> <20101006123950.GA29118@linux-sh.org> <20101006131825.GO13563@erda.amd.com> <20101006133041.GA29273@linux-sh.org> Message-ID: <20101006155026.GT13563@erda.amd.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 06.10.10 09:30:41, Paul Mundt wrote: > On Wed, Oct 06, 2010 at 03:18:25PM +0200, Robert Richter wrote: > > So, I am also fine with implementing a generic perf_pmu_name() for sh > > and then derive the oprofile cpu_type string from it in the oprofile > > code. > > > Again, this is unacceptable. Paul, maybe I misunderstood you, but isn't this you preferred solution? We make perf_pmu_name() part of the generic i/f and then derive the oprofile name from the pmu name provided by perf. -Robert -- Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. Operating System Research Center