From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Robert Richter Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2010 14:48:28 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 0/6] Generalise ARM perf-events backend for oprofile Message-Id: <20100916144828.GD13563@erda.amd.com> List-Id: References: <1284372533.3042.11.camel@e102144-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <20100913111850.GC14882@console-pimps.org> In-Reply-To: <20100913111850.GC14882@console-pimps.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Matt Fleming Cc: Will Deacon , Paul Mundt , Russell King , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-sh@vger.kernel.org" , Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar , Frederic Weisbecker , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , "linux-arch@vger.kernel.org" On 13.09.10 07:18:50, Matt Fleming wrote: > On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 11:08:53AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote: > > I've tested this patch series on a multicore Cortex-A9 board. If I > > revert patch 5/6 (ARM: Make oprofile depend on CONFIG_HW_PERF_EVENTS) > > then everything seems to work fine. Otherwise, testing without > > HW_PERF_EVENTS doesn't fall back to timer mode. > > > > So, with the exception of the patch above: > > > > Tested-by: Will Deacon > > Hi Will, thanks for testing! > > Ah yeah, making oprofile rely on CONFIG_HW_PERF_EVENTS is too > strict. I hadn't noticed that armpmu_get_pmu_id() is wrapped in > CONFIG_HW_PERF_EVENTS and had intended op->cpu_type to be NULL and so > we'd fallback to the timer mode. > > This patch needs to be dropped entirely (though another patch should > conditionally include oprofile_perf.o based on CONFIG_HW_PERF_EVENT > like I had in my original series). Matt, yes, the patch set looks good so far. With the exception of some minor comments I made and patch #5 dropped, we should be fine. Please update the patches. Thanks, -Robert -- Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. Operating System Research Center