From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from e32.co.us.ibm.com (e32.co.us.ibm.com [32.97.110.150]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "e32.co.us.ibm.com", Issuer "Equifax" (verified OK)) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4054DDE19 for ; Wed, 11 Jul 2007 07:34:00 +1000 (EST) Received: from d03relay02.boulder.ibm.com (d03relay02.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.227]) by e32.co.us.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l6ALSUi2005328 for ; Tue, 10 Jul 2007 17:28:30 -0400 Received: from d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (d03av02.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.168]) by d03relay02.boulder.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v8.3) with ESMTP id l6ALXr3f243234 for ; Tue, 10 Jul 2007 15:33:55 -0600 Received: from d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d03av02.boulder.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id l6ALXph7010936 for ; Tue, 10 Jul 2007 15:33:53 -0600 Message-ID: <4693FB3C.4060305@us.ibm.com> Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 16:33:48 -0500 From: Maynard Johnson MIME-Version: 1.0 To: willschm@linux.vnet.ibm.com Subject: Re: Resend: [PATCH] oprofile support for Power 5++ References: <4693CC5B.4020207@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <14287.1184096639@neuling.org> <4693E7EF.4020708@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <911.1184099498@neuling.org> <1184101660.22547.104.camel@farscape.rchland.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <1184101660.22547.104.camel@farscape.rchland.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Michael Neuling , mjw@linux.vnet.ibm.com Reply-To: maynardj@us.ibm.com List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Will Schmidt wrote: > On Tue, 2007-07-10 at 15:31 -0500, Michael Neuling wrote: > >>>>Does it make more sense to call this "ppc64/power5+rev3"? >>>> >>> >>>This is a change to support new counter setup for oprofile. It may be the >>>same if there is a revision 4 or 5 etc. So since the internal name was ++ I have no idea if there will be a revision 4, etc, but I'm assuming the behavior would be the same as rev 3. So I'm not in favor of changing this string to include "rev3" in it. But whatever decision is made, I hope it can be made soon. The OProfile community is testing a release candidate right now that includes the userspace portion of this issue which checks for the string "ppc64/power5++". We hope to GA this next oprofile release very soon. Thanks. -Maynard >>>I followed that convention. > > > There is an oprofile change already made, or in-flight, or at least > submitted, that will be looking for the "power5++" string, so if the > string changes here, it'll need to be changed there too. > > ( http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.oprofile/4670 ) > > >>I'm not too fussed, but if rev 4 comes out, the counters change and we >>need power5+++, it's gonna look pretty silly :-) > > > silly, but would be funny to see. :-) > > >>Mikey >>_______________________________________________ >>Linuxppc-dev mailing list >>Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org >>https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev > >