From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: will.deacon@arm.com (Will Deacon)
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2016 10:31:31 +0100
Subject: [RFCv4 0/7]  arm_pmu/perf tools: play nicely with CPU PMU cpumasks
In-Reply-To: <20160908181657.GX10153@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <1473330112-28528-1-git-send-email-mark.rutland@arm.com>
 <20160908162502.GB4801@kernel.org>
 <20160908181657.GX10153@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Message-ID: <20160909093131.GC20192@arm.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 08:16:57PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 01:25:02PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > Em Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 11:21:45AM +0100, Mark Rutland escreveu:
> > > Hi,
> > > 
> > > I'm trying to make the perf tool play better with PMUs in heterogeneous systems
> > > (e.g. big.LITTLE), where there are several logical PMUs, each covering a subset
> > > of CPUs.
> > 
> > So I added 6/7 and 7/7 to my local perf/core branch, I think they can go
> > before the others, Peter, do you want me to take the kernel parts as
> > well?
> 
> arm pmu stuff usually goes through the arm tree. Up to Mark I suppose.

I can queue the kernel bits once I've reviewed them (will try to take a
look today).

Will